I've always had a problem with the simulation theory. Say the universe is a simulation, we would still be real. As real as we are existing as an amalgamation of waves propagating through space time. Say we are a simulation by a super intelligent race of aliens, I fail to see how that makes us any less real. My reality is real to me at least, for the simple reason that I think therefore I am.
Are you sure you are the one thinking tho? what if something is thinking trough you, we dont really Know how thoughts are formed (sorry for my english)
this reminds me of the Platonic allegory of the cave. we can never really know what exists beyond our potentially limited perception. our reality may not truly be what is happening, but I don’t know that we’ll ever be able to see beyond those shadows on the cave wall.
I see this less as a break-down of causality and more as a break-down of the *analogy* of the curvature of space being like a shadow or a footprint. What this is saying is that the mass doesn't cause the curvature and the curvature doesn't cause the mass. The mass is the curvature and the curvature is the mass.
People think of the 3D analogy the wrong way. It seems most physicists don't even grasp it. ALL mass is altering the spacetime field. Every single particle. So it's not one 'dimple' like the diagrams are showing. The mass is bending into ITSELF at the very nucleus of every single atom. What we perceive is the net result of all those curvatures combined. And also remember, it's denting inside itself. It's not a 'dimple', it's pulling in spacetime from every direction. Does that alone not change how this phenomenon is perceived?
_" The mass is the curvature and the curvature is the mass."_ If so then every atom is the size of the universe. Because if you had 2 atoms a gazillion light years apart & nothing else in the universe, then eventually they would collide. Even if you take into account dark energy the curvature still affects them. Therefore the curavture is a gazillion light years wide => the atom is the size of the universe.
If the question is: "Am I real?" the answer is still, "Yes." as the projection exists just as much as what is projecting it, otherwise neither exists in reality. A shadow isn't a great example, as a shadow is the absence of something; clearly this isn't the case with our existence, as we have proven that mass and matter exist. A better analogy comes from screen projectors. We may be equivalent to the light that shines on a projector screen from the projector. That pattern of light exists, therefore we exist, otherwise, we would not be.
ur analogy makes much more sense, i was so confused with the shadow one. however i am still confused as to how we could be just projections when we have mass and are made of matter?
@@lena-jh7vi howdy! The idea of the video is to explain how our idea of a foot making footprint could be reversed, which at first sounds like crazy talk, right? The foot, however, represents *mass*, whereas the footprint represents *space time* and its conformity to mass. Spacetime will bend around mass, any mass, but the larger the mass the bigger the effect. Gravity is the result of this. You know the model where a flexible sheet has a ball in the middle and the sheet bends? That's space time, and the ball is mass of any kind. The well that forms is the gravitational well. Now, what our discoveries of black holes *might* suggest, is that instead of *mass* causing space time to bend and warp, it is actually that warpage that forms the mass within. The example in the video is good, as it demonstrates that squeezing down the stretch in the fabric of space time would also, theoretically, squeeze down anything inside. Additionally, the mathematical conclusion that hawking radiation does *not* rely on previously existing matter or mass to come into existence shows us that matter does indeed show reliance on the bends in space time. Therefore, our existence may be the result of space time casting its "projection" on existence, simply forming things within those bends that result in things like us. I'm no expert, but I am an analyst, so take this all with a grain of salt and more than a little alcohol! I hope I explained well, this stuff is difficult!
Have we proven mass and matter exist? Solipsism says the only thing we can be certain of is that one’s own mind exist, anything beyond that could just be all in our heads.
@@slapmyfunkybass yes, because imperial evidence proves that mass and matter exist to our known laws of physics. Even as a projection, matter and mass *must* exist because otherwise they could not be measured. The very idea that we only know our mind exists breaks the logic because then the world is our mind and therefore exists.
@@SideBit SLapmyfunkybass is just playing philosophical devils advocate. Solipsism is quite the philosophical mind bender. But personally i couldnt even begin to imagine it as a true possibility. Why would you hurt yourself? Everyone experiences pain and or "evil" at some point. Regardless of mass and physics if you were the only existence and the rest of us were projections of that mind then that would make you "God" technically.
Feel like this is not really worth getting a existential crisis over, reality is in the end not a consept in a book but the life you live right now. If i told you you that the universe was actually all inside the ahole of dinosaur, it would also not change anyting at all, in any way. but i it is fun to think about
@@MouseGoat So if I'm in a perfectly DARK box, I am everything? No shadow no air, no one hears Me suffocating. But nothing has happened until Some-one else opens it & looks in. Now They cast a shadow: am I that DARK God that controls that person(s)? It's that Filo Sofie thing. G'dluk w/the nonsense.
It’s so interesting to me how the more fundamental you get in discussing the nature(s) of mechanical causality / physics it can seem to have deep philosophical implications
Andrew - Because people base their entire BELEIFS on it. Sometimes even their life's and careers . We put so much EMOTION and intension on being right.. And run with that as the stable of everything and anything. This is why religion has the upper hand. Because we don't need to know everything. We just know that their is a greater power or mystery to life that defies much of our explanation. And that we have certain moral, ethical, and spiritual teachings that are implied in how to live happier and better lives, while being in harmony with that all powerful being. And helps us to restore in some form of complete oneness after this life... In other words why do you need to focus on black holes? What is really more important in this world. And we call these people geniuses!?!?!?!
I was told this by a very smart man. He said "if u want to know the secrets of reality look from within as well as from without." He was stating that look at a star for example. They are created from a gathering of matter like we are a formation of cells. The largest scale of the universe explains everything in the smallest scale as well as in between. We are the universe and it is all manifested. The answers to understanding are from within ur own mind u just need to open ur perspective to see.
Did you see that representation of the biggest scale of the universe ? The way matter is arranged strangely reminds us of the neuro paths of the brain.
before using knowledge, determine the nature of knowledge. epistemology. if knowledge is unknowable (epistemological solipsism) beyond the self, then you can determine the real value of astrum videos. for instance, the closing that certainty is somehow comforting.. where there is certainty, consideration is absent. i'd rather perpetual consideration than perpetual certainty, wouldn't it seem?
No matter what medium your conscious experience takes place through, it is still a conscious experience, and that is the beauty of it. It does not matter if you are a shadow, a simulation, or a puppet, if you are aware, then that is a gift.
@@alancham4 The whole idea of all of this being a simulation is a thought experiment, i think. Afterall, how does knowing it is a sim really change anything? Tomorrow the sun will rise and water will still be wet.
A robot doesn't feel itself consciousness, but we do. We always try to understand universe as a subject, as if, we were put here from somewhere outside. If we, made of universe particles, have the feeling of 'I', which no complex biology can't give, maybe whole universe is conscious. Basically understanding what am 'I', can answer what is everything. It's just another POV.
Funny how this kinda falls in line with the "We are just dreams of a slumbering god" mythology. Also, I don't find it concerning at all. It doesn't really matter which is true, it won't really make a practical difference. Nothing would actually be any different except I would know about it. Like you said, I will still think and feel etc. What is "real" anyway? It's what your mind makes real. If I was in a virtual reality and felt the wind on my arm that's not real wind... But the feeling is still real, is it not?
The part about the wind in VR is real to YOU. If someone is just watching you, they won't experience it, so then the wind is not real to them. So now you've end up with 2 real persons experiencing something that is real for 1 person but not the other. Not that anything is wrong with this, but it's interesting to think about.
The reason you don’t feel real is because we can only see 7 colors, and only comprehend 3D form and space. I theorize the soul/consciousness is not 3D. The soul/consciousness clearly is not 1D or 2D either, as we can see and comprehend those. But the soul/consciousness is something we cannot see or comprehend. For all of history, people have reported and acknowledged the spiritual, the soul, and spirits. But we all acknowledge we cannot see them. Some people do see spirits, but not like a opaque waking Human man. People see spirits in various different forms but usually they never see spirits. They only see the effects they have on the surroundings. Sometimes spirits can be heard, or move objects. The reason we can’t see them though is because they do not have 3D forms. They exist in 4D or higher, their forms can’t be comprehended by our brains. They don’t even register because we do not have the capabilities to recognize anything higher than 3D. But we can study them by their effects on the surroundings. They exist within the Laws of Physics, which means invisibility can only be explained by colors and forms that our brains can not register. This is what happens to animals who can’t see certain colors or forms, they will see nothing, or it will be invisible. The same goes for us. Don’t tell me that if we can coexist with 1D 2D and 3D , that there isn’t also 4D and 5D objects etc. It’s just we haven’t evolved to comprehend that far yet. We are mentally limited still. However no one can deny that the spiritual has been acknowledged for all time. It is because we exist multidimensionally. We are 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D and so on… But our brain only can see and comprehend 3D and below. The soul is a 4D (or higher) part of our self. The human body is 3D, it is the mass it is the object, but we also exist in higher dimensions even though we cannot see them. This is why I truly believe in the soul. Because it is real, we just cannot see or comprehend it, but it has always been acknowledged and felt and known instinctually to be real. That’s because it is part of our natural body. Our body is not just physical. It is multi dimensional and also our body can be projected in 4D and when it is, that is what the soul is… The 4D self. This is what the concept is of spirituality, higher dimensions are not like Heaven or Hell. It is simply 1D 2D 3D 4D and so on. We have 3D comprehension so far. If we ever evolve above and move to 4D comprehension and form, you can say we have “ascended” or reached “god hood” But it is really not that, it’s just adding an extra dimension of comprehension like 4D comprehension. Each time a new dimension is comprehensively unlocked, you will be opened up to a whole new dimension to see the Universe in. More colors more options for shapes and forms, more options on movement, more options on perception/sight, more options on communication etc. Everything widens and broadens up each time a new comprehensive dimension is added. This is what spirituality really is! This theory of mine meshes Science and Spirituality together. This is the science behind the powerful/deep emotions that the experience of adding a new comprehensive layer adds. This is what spirituality is trying to grasp at in the dark. Spirituality is an intuitive and instinctual acknowledgement that there is more layers of comprehension for us to achieve. Unfortunately in our lifetime we will never be able to see in 4D, but if we could, it is 100% possible and 100% would happen that we would see shapes, colors, light, movement we have NEVER seen before, that always existed right beside us, but we couldn’t see it because our brains cannot register anything beyond 3D. This can be proven when you put flowers under Ultra Violet light. When you put flower petals under UV light, you see there are patterns on white rose petals that you could never see if you were only using your bare eyes. Patterns on flowers exist every day, but we never see them. We just see white roses, but those same white roses have patterns all over their petals, and reflect light patterns for Bees and bugs, but we would never know that because our sensory functions and comprehension are extremely limited. We can only comprehend 1D, 2D, 3D and only see 7 colors. Don’t tell me that there aren’t things we cannot see. If you research the full spectrum of all colors in existence, you will see that is only seeing 7 colors accounts for about less than 0.01% of all colors that DO exist. So do not, do noooooooooot tell me that there aren’t things in existence that are invisible to us, right now. Because there is.
Yes. Your experience is a real experience. A real dream, a real what ever you wast to call it. What the Buddhist call real is " not changing". That there is awareness, that is ever present to awareness. What would "not awareness" feel like to awareness? Nothing at all, it would not register at all to awareness. No death, just the thought of it. No past or future, just the thought of it. Eternally here and now. No i or you. As the ego (sens of separate self) can dissolve or be recognized as a process identified to. Yeah. Sweet dream
When the question goes from being "Am I real?" to the simple contrasting answer to that question being "I am reality", do you then take something complicated and multifaceted and reduce it down to something tangible and observable as fact. We are as much the Universe as the Universe is us so in order to understand what we are, we must first understand what it is.
This is what I think. I theorize the soul/consciousness is not 3D. The soul/consciousness clearly is not 1D or 2D either, as we can see and comprehend those. But the soul/consciousness is something we cannot see or comprehend. For all of history, people have reported and acknowledged the spiritual, the soul, and spirits. But we all acknowledge we cannot see them. Some people do see spirits, but not like a opaque waking Human man. People see spirits in various different forms but usually they never see spirits. They only see the effects they have on the surroundings. Sometimes spirits can be heard, or move objects. The reason we can’t see them though is because they do not have 3D forms. They exist in 4D or higher, their forms can’t be comprehended by our brains. They don’t even register because we do not have the capabilities to recognize anything higher than 3D. But we can study them by their effects on the surroundings. They exist within the Laws of Physics, which means invisibility can only be explained by colors and forms that our brains can not register. This is what happens to animals who can’t see certain colors or forms, they will see nothing, or it will be invisible. The same goes for us. Don’t tell me that if we can coexist with 1D 2D and 3D , that there isn’t also 4D and 5D objects etc. It’s just we haven’t evolved to comprehend that far yet. We are mentally limited still. However no one can deny that the spiritual has been acknowledged for all time. It is because we exist multidimensionally. We are 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D and so on… But our brain only can see and comprehend 3D and below. The soul is a 4D (or higher) part of our self. The human body is 3D, it is the mass it is the object, but we also exist in higher dimensions even though we cannot see them. This is why I truly believe in the soul. Because it is real, we just cannot see or comprehend it, but it has always been acknowledged and felt and known instinctually to be real. That’s because it is part of our natural body. Our body is not just physical. It is multi dimensional and also our body can be projected in 4D and when it is, that is what the soul is… The 4D self. This is what the concept is of spirituality, higher dimensions are not like Heaven or Hell. It is simply 1D 2D 3D 4D and so on. We have 3D comprehension so far. If we ever evolve above and move to 4D comprehension and form, you can say we have “ascended” or reached “god hood” But it is really not that, it’s just adding an extra dimension of comprehension like 4D comprehension. Each time a new dimension is comprehensively unlocked, you will be opened up to a whole new dimension to see the Universe in. More colors more options for shapes and forms, more options on movement, more options on perception/sight, more options on communication etc. Everything widens and broadens up each time a new comprehensive dimension is added. This is what spirituality really is! This theory of mine meshes Science and Spirituality together. This is the science behind the powerful/deep emotions that the experience of adding a new comprehensive layer adds. This is what spirituality is trying to grasp at in the dark. Spirituality is an intuitive and instinctual acknowledgement that there is more layers of comprehension for us to achieve. Unfortunately in our lifetime we will never be able to see in 4D, but if we could, it is 100% possible and 100% would happen that we would see shapes, colors, light, movement we have NEVER seen before, that always existed right beside us, but we couldn’t see it because our brains cannot register anything beyond 3D. This can be proven when you put flowers under Ultra Violet light. When you put flower petals under UV light, you see there are patterns on white rose petals that you could never see if you were only using your bare eyes. Patterns on flowers exist every day, but we never see them. We just see white roses, but those same white roses have patterns all over their petals, and reflect light patterns for Bees and bugs, but we would never know that because our sensory functions and comprehension are extremely limited. We can only comprehend 1D, 2D, 3D and only see 7 colors. Don’t tell me that there aren’t things we cannot see. If you research the full spectrum of all colors in existence, you will see that is only seeing 7 colors accounts for about less than 0.01% of all colors that DO exist. So do not, do noooooooooot tell me that there aren’t things in existence that are invisible to us, right now. Because there is.
This reminds me of videos that project 4D objects into 3D to help understand them. If we pushed a ball into a 2D world, 2D people would first see a dot appear, that then became a growing circle until the ball is inserted halfway. Similarly we and everything around us could be 3D projections of 4D objects. I mean, if spacetime curves, then where does it curve into if not into a fourth spacial dimension?
If we stay within the analogy so that the information of the 3d universe depends on its 2d surface then the information of the 4d universe emerges from its 3d volume.
I feel that its so indistinguishable that the reality is that we aren't real and its all a projection or dream, much like philosophers postulated back in the day. It's all the more reason to live life as a dream and have the adventure you've always wanted and it points to the spiritual growth that can be achieved by humanity if we all embraced this concept and lived our lives around it.
And yet people mock others for believing God as they themselves embrace the notion that nothing real exists... excuse me while I and my other 12th dimensional beings laugh in diagonal purple thunder.
You can't use words such as 'spiritual growth' 'life as a dream' 'philosophers' to explain to a crowd of scientific hobby/passion. As soon as they hear this they'll WANT it to be woo-woo in their heads since most stuff that uses those words IS woo-woo. It's just how the mind works, it likes to validate it's past experiences and what it has heard from others.
Fascinating. Years ago, I was really "into" spirituality. I stopped shortly after I realized that what it was teaching (if one really considers both what was presented, and what can be inferred) was that our "selves", our consciousness (and beyond) is NOT within our mind/brain (in other words, inside our skulls), but that we are actually OUTSIDE, being a part of the entire Universe. This explains why "out of body" experiences are instantaneous...and the essence of the Universe (by definition, our _selves_ ) create a focal point which we perceive as our brain/mind. This video made me remember all that, from 40+ years ago.
You could say we are separations/splinters off of the Universe. We are conscious separately of only ourself because we are separations. It insinuates that the Universe is conscious as a whole, and we are just leaves plucked from its branches, causing individual consciousness.
*take what i say lightly, I am attempting to mesh the spiritual and the scientific in one comment* Here we go.. I theorize the soul/consciousness is not 3D. The soul/consciousness clearly is not 1D or 2D either, as we can see and comprehend those. But the soul/consciousness is something we cannot see or comprehend. For all of history, people have reported and acknowledged the spiritual, the soul, and spirits. But we all acknowledge we cannot see them. Some people do see spirits, but not like a opaque waking Human man. People see spirits in various different forms but usually they never see spirits. They only see the effects they have on the surroundings. Sometimes spirits can be heard, or move objects. The reason we can’t see them though is because they do not have 3D forms. They exist in 4D or higher, their forms can’t be comprehended by our brains. They don’t even register because we do not have the capabilities to recognize anything higher than 3D. But we can study them by their effects on the surroundings. They exist within the Laws of Physics, which means invisibility can only be explained by colors and forms that our brains can not register. This is what happens to animals who can’t see certain colors or forms, they will see nothing, or it will be invisible. The same goes for us. Don’t tell me that if we can coexist with 1D 2D and 3D , that there isn’t also 4D and 5D objects etc. It’s just we haven’t evolved to comprehend that far yet. We are mentally limited still. However no one can deny that the spiritual has been acknowledged for all time. It is because we exist multidimensionally. We are 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D and so on… But our brain only can see and comprehend 3D and below. The soul is a 4D (or higher) part of our self. The human body is 3D, it is the mass it is the object, but we also exist in higher dimensions even though we cannot see them. This is why I truly believe in the soul. Because it is real, we just cannot see or comprehend it, but it has always been acknowledged and felt and known instinctually to be real. That’s because it is part of our natural body. Our body is not just physical. It is multi dimensional and also our body can be projected in 4D and when it is, that is what the soul is… The 4D self. This is what the concept is of spirituality, higher dimensions are not like Heaven or Hell. It is simply 1D 2D 3D 4D and so on. We have 3D comprehension so far. If we ever evolve above and move to 4D comprehension and form, you can say we have “ascended” or reached “god hood” But it is really not that, it’s just adding an extra dimension of comprehension like 4D comprehension. Each time a new dimension is comprehensively unlocked, you will be opened up to a whole new dimension to see the Universe in. More colors more options for shapes and forms, more options on movement, more options on perception/sight, more options on communication etc. Everything widens and broadens up each time a new comprehensive dimension is added. This is what spirituality really is! This theory of mine meshes Science and Spirituality together. This is the science behind the powerful/deep emotions that the experience of adding a new comprehensive layer adds. This is what spirituality is trying to grasp at in the dark. Spirituality is an intuitive and instinctual acknowledgement that there is more layers of comprehension for us to achieve. Unfortunately in our lifetime we will never be able to see in 4D, but if we could, it is 100% possible and 100% would happen that we would see shapes, colors, light, movement we have NEVER seen before, that always existed right beside us, but we couldn’t see it because our brains cannot register anything beyond 3D. This can be proven when you put flowers under Ultra Violet light. When you put flower petals under UV light, you see there are patterns on white rose petals that you could never see if you were only using your bare eyes. Patterns on flowers exist every day, but we never see them. We just see white roses, but those same white roses have patterns all over their petals, and reflect light patterns for Bees and bugs, but we would never know that because our sensory functions and comprehension are extremely limited. We can only comprehend 1D, 2D, 3D and only see 7 colors. Don’t tell me that there aren’t things we cannot see. If you research the full spectrum of all colors in existence, you will see that is only seeing 7 colors accounts for about less than 0.01% of all colors that DO exist. So do not, do noooooooooot tell me that there aren’t things in existence that are invisible to us, right now. Because there is.
This was an outstandingly well put together video discussion. I have never seen anyone explain thse topics in such an understandable and self relating manner. Thank You! This was amazing.
This makes a little more sense. I picture Hawking Radiation as the “rubber sheet” (spacetime) interacting with the mass directly like “friction.” I picture the rubber sheet being pulled or stretched (as our universe is not static) as well as mass “rolling” across the surface, causing energy to be stripped away and/or left behind. Think of a bowling ball trapped in a “gravity well” of a sheet, and that sheet moved underneath it like the way a belt sander would. Over time, the sheet (durability permitting) would wear down the bowling ball. It would take a long time, but that is the gist of it. The Hawking Radiation would just be the product of this process, where the “rubber meets the road” so to speak. The implication to this, would be that every object that has mass in the universe would give off Hawking Radiation to some extent proportional to it’s gravitational interaction with spacetime, relative to the surface area the mass/energy is spread out over. The higher the concentration of mass the greater the friction relative to the “contact patch” with the surrounding spacetime.
I had an analogy of a white hole replacing time with space, it be the oposite of a singularity, were the farther away you move from it the less space there is and matter is pushed out, like a plane
@@theterminaldave I imagine that is possible, as the Hawking Radiation is just fancy description of a process for photon emission. I am not sure of the distribution or energy density of these photons, as black holes aren’t particularly “luminous”, generally speaking. When I see discussions of using energy from blackholes, I see them trying to convert rotational energy or spin from the blackhole as a way to effectively generate power. There is probably more than one way to skin Schrödinger’s Cat.
This reminds me of the theory of the holographic universe. Also reminds me of the idea that we are 3D shadows of 4D or even more dimensional worlds Nothing here implies that we aren’t real, just that our reality is more complex than we realize
3:34 - The equivalence principle applies only locally. The acceleration due to the rocket wouldn't manifest the differential acceleration (tidal effect) but the acceleration due to gravity would. So NO! There IS a way (for a macroscopic object like a person) to tell the difference!
there are so many mind bending ideas and observations about the nature of time, the expansion of space, and how these two relate to gravity.. just floating around right now in the collective mind... like there's a profound discovery just out of reach, just waiting for the right dots to be connected...
Man I'm so glad I subscribed, all your videos just blow my mind. You strike a great balance of informing people on complex theories and tech without talking down to us. Love it.
That is making sense. When you search further into what matter is, it is far from being a solid block of anything. As a fluid element, it would be strange that it would not be part of a larger ecosystem of forces. Thanks for the video :)
I watch tons of videos on space and physics. I can comfortably say this one has blown my mind more than any other space/physics video. Wow. The paradigm shift in my perspective on black holes is immense. Thank you.
@@pootzeketzi1233 PBS spacetime is amazing, but this video was 100% on Matt O'Dowds level. This was an excellent video, maybe the best I've seen on the subject of gravity and spacetime curvature.
“Real” is such a vague term tho. I dunno if “real” should only mean that it *physically* exists and can “only be physically interacted with”, or if “real” should just mean that it exists in “any way, shape or form.” i.e. that digital file _obviously_ exists in _”some way, shape, or form.”_ It’s a real file that takes up storage on some hard drive, whether it be accessed from your computer internally or via the cloud connected to a server somewhere else in the world. We can’t physically TOUCH IT, but it’s definitively there, and obviously not only a figment of our imagination, for example, like with the video file of this TH-cam video stored on TH-cam’s servers. So I guess the thing is that even if we _are_ “caused by the footprint,” that shouldn’t mean that we’re “not real,” but rather, it just means that “we” might just be one side of the coin, the other side being the curvature of spacetime. I guess maybe me thinking this way is just helping me from having an existential crisis right now lol
You can apply this reasoning to thoughts. Physically we could say they’re just electrical signals and waves but what about the information. Where does information come from? And is the information any less “real” than the physical means of delivery? Some of the most beautiful works of music, art, and literature were nothing more than information in someone’s head that were made “real” for all to experience.
I am as real as the reality that defines me. Reality is a simulation, at the very least it's a simulation of itself. Every part of the simulation experienced by an individual is an interpretation of it's interaction. When you touch something hot, the heat energy doesn't travel up your arm and enter you brain, it's translated through the nerve as an electrical impulse that is then interpreted by the brain to define a meaning. But the great thing is that you aren't bound by a default interpretation. You have a conscious mind, with an imagination; you can interpret what you see and how you feel, in any way you choose.
I don't put much weight behind this myself in serious terms but I do believe anything is possible, it could be that there are 'shadows' of us too and it just carries on forever, in both directions.
I don't think it means that. The shadow is as much the real self as the basic workings that produce it, be they bio-chemical or even deeper than this causality thing. Just like a computer programme on your screen vs. the programming and bits and bytes. The screen -- the shadow -- is the higher self, not the underlying stuff
Well it's taken you the long way around, but you've come around. This is what Joseph, Ballum, Isiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Socrates and Plato, The Essenes (with their books of Enoch), John the Baptist all said 3000-2000 years ago in written text. But that was stupid....right. Trust the science we say.
@@STho205 even the "holy" scriptures refers to god as everything around us...so I refer to my god as the Universe. Yes, seems we cyclically lose and rediscover ancient wisdom. So that we do not repeat humanities mistakes. 😮💨
@@sublime4212 in order to understand the comment, someone’s mind, that person would require to acknowledge their presence or their mind. It does not provide clear evidence if said person is aware. Therefore, the comment would still be correct to a certain extent. The lack of knowledge in physics of the universe led to said mind to be blown. Therefore, it would be technically lack knowledge or understanding that has bewilder said person. They can change in due time, but at that very moment, the entity itself is blown away by the lack of knowledge and accepted they lack that knowledge. I may be wrong though. Just a thought :D
If all this is actually how the universe works... why would it be disturbing? Learning about it didn't change anything. The system doesn't get replaced just because we know about it, no matter what Douglas Adams had to say about that. 😄
All it takes for a shadow to disappear is for the light switch to be flipped... If we are indeed a "shadow" of something "more" then who's to say all this can't just be switched off
@@jimreaper1337 You realize that's true no matter what, right? Not to make the daily existential horror any worse, but you, the planet, the whole universe could all be destroyed at the speed of light or faster for predictable causes, unpredictable causes, and the literally infinite class of unknown and unknowable causes.
People who have deep meditation and say they can access spiritual "world " What we are and see isnt real , and we are all or connected to everything ( maybe some kind of amazing advanced ilusion ) Like in our dreams ( we can see , feel , toutch , etc ) Yet can we say our dreams are a reality ? Dreams are almost like what we call reality , yet we say its just a dream and this is reality But our reality can be just an advanced type of dream ( liking it or not its really possible )
Thank you Astrum, great channel that doesn't mindlessly repeat keywords throughout the video like most do. You just deliver good and I teresting knowdge. Amazing
High thoughts: Stirring a liquid with high force in a container so that one creates a sufficient acceleration in the fluid so that the floor of that container can be seen (like a whirlpool). Black holes are created by huge masses creating high acceleration of matter toward it (gravity). But the matter that isn't so heavily influenced by its gravity is able to move give off that whirl pool appearance. What if that whirl pool effect similar to stirring liquid in a container opens up the possibility that the floor of the black hole is just the container that holds the space and time of our dimension. Breaking through that might allow for passing into alternative dimensions or mirror dimensions.
This is interesting. I imagined tea being stirred in a cup. If enough force is applied to the cup of the stirred tea on the outside it could shatter the tea's reality and spill into the unknown.
I still don't get how black holes exist at all. If time slows down as you get closer to a black hole, shouldn't that mean the universe dies and the black hole evaporates before you can cross the event horizon? Just like you need infinite energy to reach the speed of light, shouldn't you need an infinite amount of time to reach the event horizon? I get that time locally flows normally, but if you were to watch the universe as you fall in, you'd see everything moving faster and faster, and eventually witness the death of the universe in whatever form it takes before you cross the event horizon. So how the hell does anything enter a black hole at all??? Shouldn't it all be basically frozen at the event horizon from our perspective?
You are right and actually the only reason why we can't see it anymore is because the light photons become so spread out that it just fades into oblivion
@@astrumspace so how the heck does matter get inside in the first place? Is it just that everything inside the schwarzchild radius collapses into a singularity, and everything after that just hangs out at the event horizon? Or as matter builds up around the black hole, the event horizon expands and swallows up the stuff closest to it? It doesn't make sense to me, because if you need infinite time to cross a threshold, but the threshold can cross you in a finite amount of time, what even does that mean??? The more I think about black holes, the less sense they make to me lol
As I understand it, as you approach the event horizon your mass effects the mass of the black hole system increasing it. This increases the size of the event horizon causing it to absorb you. You do not enter the black hole, it swallows you a bit at a time. This is why stars don't just vanish in. They are stopped by time at the horizon and absorbed as the black hole gains mass. Kinda backwards really, the black hole doesn't get bigger because it ate you, it gets bigger in order to eat you.
Rex Mundi... But yet we all listen to them as if they are God. Its kind of sad when you hear a person say that life is just a bunch of numbers. You pity what's it like to live in that brain.
To anyone interested in fiction/fantasy works, have a look at "Throne of the Magical Arcana". The book uses the projection theory as a basis to build the world. Honestly, just this much can be considered a spoiler for the story.
There are some leaps in logic here but I really enjoyed the video in a writerly Lovecraftian way. On the cosmic scale there are things like red-shifting, cosmic background radiation and Hubble expansion, ideas much of astronomy is based upon, all pointing to a universe-sized arrow for time, rather than a collection of Black Holes with their own Shadow Continuity. Hawking Radiation honestly makes easy sense. Otherwise Black Holes would be eternal and functionally ‘break’ physics. Whether or not Time “stops” when the Universe reaches Heat-Death is where much of thinking seems to be now.
@@xenorac this is about as dumbed down as it gets and was explained brilliantly, but I can tell you from experience that it helps immensely to look up the meanings of any words or concepts you may not understand. When I started studying physics a few years back I struggled with this, and I continue learning every single day. The amount of knowledge on these subjects is endless, and can take a while to learn even basic concepts sometimes.
@@warmbutteredtoast1923 PBS is not made for the uninitiated. It’s for ppl who are actively studying these subjects. It’s no coincidence that the audience can ask very specific questions that Matt will then answer to. It’s not for kids or curious ppl who may ask “but what is light made of?” or stuff like that. It’s more “here’s my calculations and the results I got differ from yours, could you explain why?”
Einstein explicitly notes that his equivalence principle is a convention. To state that there would be no difference to us between experiencing earth's gravity and being in a rocket with the appropriate momentum is an axiom of our physics, not a consequence of our physics. These philosophical differences matter when we are taking the time to speculate on what theory could mean. I believe it is important to highlight where our best judgments enter and our data depart
The shadow/darkness was always there. That does make sense. Light is finite. Objects are also ultimately finite. A shadow is "cast" by blocking light to reveal the darkness that was already there. Not scientific by my wording, but certainly observational.
"Are we shadows?" *"Once, I was a great invincible warrior. And no one dared to stand in my way. I travelled the lands searching for a worthy opponent, until I opened the Gates of Shadows..."*
So if we're made of waves energy but were also projections made by the curvature of space, could this mean that each wave of energy that is projected is also projecting infinite dimensions(versions) of "us" ultimately creating the multiverse?
I'm no physicist but I've actually been wondering about this. whether mass could be defined by its gravity rather than the other way around. seems most likely that both exist simultaneously rather than one "causing" the other though
@@sohummohare6364 well that's in high school. Surely this is new discovery and thus lead to new equations to be used. Maybe in the future fundamental physicists can develop an equation that can determine mass by its spacetime curvature and possibly even dark matter
It's amazing we know so much about something that has never been found. Ever hear the saying don't judge a book by its cover? We see a still photo of a black hole and make so many assumptions about how they work and what happens to matter around it, even when no one has actually observed it.
So time has an inertia and wants to move in a straight line, but gravity is like the carnival ride that curves our path in time. That's why our feet move slower through time than our heads. This manifests as a gradient in time, and 3 dimensional orbits in space
I've always thought of it this way: we live in a universe that seems infinite in many ways, the conservation of energy is relentless, the flatness of the universe, etc... but our witnessing of this is finite. I don't remember anything from before I was born, and it doesn't seem significant, and yet, like the tree falling in the woods without a witness, our finite yet infinitesimal point of observation of this infinite universe seems rather paramount for it to even exist. I am often inclined to believe that the universe is an illusion created by some innate tendency for order, such that it seems that the universe will always fill in the blanks where ever we choose to look. This construction of reality is so stringent that you cannot tell what is the chicken or the egg.
@@elongatedmusk3132 not like in previous lives. I’m not all that sure such a thing can be done, but I’ve two distinct impressions of memory.. one of drifting through the soft lit nebulae of the galaxy and before that, drifting through a kaleidoscope of them.. I was certainly on a journey of some importance. Haven’t visited this topic in years.
@@72marshflower15 thank you for sharing that and also thank you for not thinking I was being sarcastic or doubtful because often online people misconstrue things and my days have arguing over nothing are long gone especially online with strangers LOL but that is pretty amazing and no I don't have the same memories or visions or whatever but I do believe some of my dreams or instances whether a dream or reality but feel like deja vu or of lived that moment before May indeed be some type of memory or premonition but appreciate you sharing and explaining to me so I could understand where you're coming from have a blessed day
Your arguments support the theory that the Universe is a Hologram and we live in it. It's an idea that begins to have more supporters in the science community. Well done!
Nassim Haramein (I think is his name) has a very convincing argument for the holographic principle ( the argument that every bit of data in the universe can be found in whole in every particle) it is very convincing
I don't even see how this is weird. It just feels intuitive to me. If you think about how you never actually are ever able to touch the physical parts of two atoms against eachother, and you are just touching their areas of force against eachother, than matter being just a reflection of how space is curved makes just as much sense as the opposite. Let me rephrase it in a way that might be easier to understand. When you touch two things against eachother, you aren't actually touching the atoms against eachother. The atoms are simply being repulsed from eachother like two repulsing magnets. If you understand this, then matter being the result of spacetime curving isn't actually that strange of a thought. It just seems weird from a human perspective on how the world works, but "touching" is actually just as weird.
Almost like that the nucleus might as well not even physically exist, as it never "touches" another nucleus, and that it could almost double as just a conceptual point in space. But then you have things like quarks. And when it comes to that experiment of observing quantum particles, that they cant be observed without altering them, it almost makes you wonder if these smaller particles don't even exist until you go looking for them.
I just reread what I wrote and the first part doesn't really make sense. It isn't intuitive at all. What I meant was, it's just as intuitive as the concept of "touching" actually is.
@@altrivotzck6565 Hey you're fine, just a fun thought experiment anyway. It reminded me of the example of an atom that was the size of the stadium, would make the nucleus the size of a football.
This didn't cause me to have an existential crisis because I can't wrap little brain around what you were talking about. Nevertheless, I love this stuff. Good video.
The idea that the footprint creates the foot and not viceversa reminds me of Plato's myth of the cave, adding more complexity to the plot! Fascinating. Thanks for the detailed yet easy to follow narration.
I've had an idea that time is a condensed form of space, just like matter is for energy, and that's why the universe expands as time passes. This is also an interesting idea. Now, there is no matter or energy, just different types of space.
Only if you forget about the important time aspect to spacetime, yeah. But gravity is actually curved space*time*, not curved space. Meaning mass and energy slows down time, and that IS gravity. This is the curvature analogy we speak about: time itself being slower down, which has an end result of a curve in space and time.There are very good videos explaining this, and I do recommend them!
All other explanations have insinuated Hawking radiation is at the even horizon only, which made sense. Today's explanation is exciting, scarier and more interesting. Thank you.
2 things never made sense to me about that explanation. 1) why does it increase as the black hole gets smaller (less surface area should mean fewer virtual particles) and 2) shouldn't regular matter particles fall in at equal rates and offset the antimatter particles? This explanation definitely more interesting and makes more sense to me.
Many years ago I was in a lorry on the Woolwich ferry, London, waiting for the gate to open to let us off, and I was first in line - it was very peculiar, the gate slid up, and it took up most of your peripheral vision, because the windscreen was close to it and it literally felt like I , and the truck was sinking - due to that relativistic effect. Thank you for another brilliant video, Alex.
Only from my years of watching British crime shows do I know that your lorry is a delivery truck of some type and your windscreen is your windshield. 😊 Btw, cool story. Cheers.
Do other people similarly come to these conclusions on their own? I definitely feel like this explanation feels natural, it feels like what I expected we would learn. Is that just because I've consumed enough current content, and that's where things are pointing? When we're talking about this stuff, discussing it, it reminds me of what Einstein said about being in the right place at the right time, as discoveries were being made. Very modest, but I do get it to some extent. You can't discover Y, without first discovering A-X.
Well don't worry about this video, because it fails logically. 1. He says that everything causes curves and bends in space time like an object on a plane of fabric. That is only used as an example to give an idea of how it could work. Therefore it should not be used as the basis for claims at it hasn't been proven and therefore is unscientific. 2. He talks about particles "popping into existence". That's impossible according to one of Newton's laws. 3. Gravity can not create mass. We all knows black holes pull in light and gravity affect light right? Our mass creates gravity. Gravity pulls in the light around our hand. Let's say there is a torch shining. The hand bends the light a bit, causing less light to hit the wall behind your hand. Our hand creates the shadow by stopping the light, our hands mass creates the gravity that causes the shadow. Therefore mass creates gravity
Yeah, it's just collective knowledge, and it's being hyper accelerated by the internet. It's almost creepy how similar people are, input the same data into our brains and we'll output more or less the same stuff. People always praise "geniuses" as if they're something special, but they're not, they just happened to be one of the first to think about something and also tell other people about it or do something with that idea. But if Einstein hadn't done it someone else would have shortly after, if Bill Gates hadn't done it someone else would have shortly after. They're not special, everything would have been just the same without them because the collective knowledge required to get to that point had been accumulated and was available as input. That's basically what society is, a super computer using humans as CPU's, and the input data is called culture, then the bad ideas are pruned and the good ones continue for further computation and testing. Some people act like mp3 players would have never existed without Steve Jobs, they obviously would have, there is no possible way for all the technology we currently have to exist and nobody thinking of making a digital walkman. In this alternate future where Steve Jobs didn't exist nobody would have ever thought of playing an audio file on a phone, it's ridiculous. Obviously people would have thought of that without him, he contributed nothing. It's very obvious with an example like Steve Jobs, but the same is true for everyone else, even for people dealing with more obscure knowledge like Einstein did. Nobody is special and everyone is expendable because at the end of the day we're all trained apes and many more apes are being trained by the same environment to output the same things.
I could get behind this if it werent for 'free' thought. The mere ability to question our existence tells me that we are not the shadow. If I want to move my toe, I can. If there were an overwhelming feeling of lack of control, or if perhaps we were not even aware of the concept of control, then maybe this would be worth thinking about.
Only the choice to move your toe can be detected before you consciously make that choice, just because you feel like you are in control doesn't necessarily mean you are
This is NOT an existential Crisis. Time Field Theory on the other hand is. Because time is the 4th dimension, properties of time exist in all 4 dimensions. Time (the sequences of events) takes on different behaviors between dimension ally bound systems and effects the behavior of what we measure. -In quantum mechanics we can only either know a particles position or velocity, never both, we can only determine where a particle ends up based on a probability wave, and particles themselves appear as waves until measured. (the reason being everything in quantum mechanics is either a point, or wave that we can only me measured through a 2 D interface (a screen or polarized field). - Quantum Particles themselves have a property called entanglement where a change to one entangled particle does the opposite for the other instantaneously regardless of distance, (faster than light) Quantum entanglement, as evidenced by the double slit quantum eraser, allows future events entangled particle to alter what we measured in the past -1n empty space virtual particles pop in and out of existence purely chaotically. There is no way to measure time and there is no arrow of time. Your notion of 3 spatial dimensions and 1 are of time dimension, cause and effect, begin to break down at different dimensional scalar levels. In fact, according to General relativity all time is relative, meaning the rate of change to time VARIES The existential crisis here is that you are not just possibly a shadow of curved space, but also time, and either some form, or all forms of it: Chaos, Probability, Causality, and Relativity. 4 properties of time and 4 corresponding spacetime dimensions and fundamental laws of physics that only work at certain scales that are conceptually and mathematically contradictory that no scientist in over 100 years has been able to solve. and for all you sacred geometry types it actually takes 4 shadows of a sphere to add up to its surface area. it begs the question, how can anything even be real? Maybe the number 4?
There is the famous statement. "I think, therefore, I am." The very fact that this video exist and more impotyantly, that these ideas exist and we can ponder their meaning is proof that we exist. Further, the footprint in the sand would not have existed had someone not made it. if no one walked there or if a series of objects landed and were picked up by some force then there would be no footprint. this is kind of a "chicken or egg" argument. I believe that we were created by a deity and that we have spirits and that while the nature of our physical reality is confusing and really cannot be completely knowable, that does not negate our existence, only our understanding is flawed and we do not understand true reality as it exist.
Thank you Keith - something to think about while I ponder my Dentist appointment today. By the way - third line - you've spelt - importantly - incorrectly. Don't worry though - it hasn't created an existential crisis
yes, I think therefore I am is an idea by Rene Descartes, a 17th century philosopher. it's an argument that even though it's impossible to truly know/prove anything by way of infinite regression, one can think, therefore one exists. if this video or concept interests you, I highly reading about his famous "evil demon" argument. a more current version is known as "brain in a vat."
This theory is similar to that of Plato’s idealism, a conceptual view of reality that we, and everything we view around ourselves are false incomplete copies of a real thing.
Your channel is so outstanding! Thank you for opening these wonders to all of us who haven't received training in physics or mathematics. It is truly appreciated!
If a black hole is losing mass through hawking radiation, explain to me how that leads to the assumption that it's losing curvature in spacetime rather than literal mass??? Am I missing something here???
Hawking radiation is being produced from the space around the black hole, not the black hole itself. Therfore causing a reduction in space curvature, which causes a reduction in mass. The virtual pair that pop into existence come from the space around the black hole. One is able to escape, the other is kept within the area of space around the black hole. Which causes the reduction of curvature and in turn, mass. So, the only effect the black hole has on this process is its mass creating the curvature that retains one of the virtual pair. Space curvature is what is being directly effected, not the mass of the black hole. Which, because they are linked, reduces the mass as well. He is saying that the black hole is losing literal mass, but just not through the way that it's usually described. Hope that helps.
1. Hawking radiation is a theoretical effect, never observed, except in "analog" systems. It can't be evidence for anything by definition. It is probably true, but that's as much as we know. 2. There is no "literal mass." Mass and energy are the same thing. In GR equations, there is only energy density encoded in the stress-energy tensor. We know that energy is conserved, so if a BH emits radiation, then it loses mass/energy. Although it's not exactly correct, the radiation originates outside the horizon _due to_ mass/energy existing somewhere under the horizon, it must still balance out. We also know that GR is correct, and its equations _relate_ energy content with the curvature of spacetime. _Relate_ means there is an equal sign, but no arrow pointing one way or another. Take an equation x=2y. You can solve it for x if you know y, or for y if you know x, but it doesn't say that x _causes_ y, or the other way around, or maybe they are both caused by something third which is not in the equation. Less mass = less curvature, but both statements "mass causes curvature" and "curvature causes mass" are compatible with our understanding of physics of black holes, which is incomplete: the GR solutions contain an essential singularity, as if all mass-energy of a BH were concentrated in a single point in space, of zero volume and infinite density, in its exact center-which means it's only an approximation. Outside of black holes, the theory is totally sound, "matter tells spacetime how to curve; spacetime curvature tells matter how to move." But in case of the BH the theory breaks down. So you're likely not missing anything. 3. NG's "explanation" of Hawking radiation is nonsense. Virtual particles cannot somehow become real, they are only a mathematical "crutch" to solve QFT equations. Astrum _very explicitly_ says that it's an oft-repeated wrong explanation in the video itself. I have to point out that error, because it's the central idea of the whole presentation.
@Cy "kkm" K'Nnelson Awesome and complete explanation. Thank you for putting it in laymen. My field of expertise is in Psychological / Social science research so I understand the principle of factors and accounting for as much as is reasonably possible either side of the '=' sign, so your explanation resonated with me in terms of causality and being unable to predict directionality from effectively what is the physics equivalent of a 'correlational equation/analysis'. Thanks again and my interest in this is again piqued!
Imagine a ball in a bowl. The ball is the mass of the black hole, the bowl is the curvature of space-time. Hawking radiation makes the bowl smaller, which in turn reduces the mass of the black hole. Nothing technically escapes the black hole, but the space around it still gets smaller until nothing remains. It's like the universe (with all its matter) being compressed down into "nothing".
Are we not both? We experience mass and energy just as we experience space and time. Our bodies are structures composed of all four concepts: mass, energy, space, and time. In fact, we create our own space/time curvature. I believe we are all these things, and much more. We are the universe itself.
Reflection is key. "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge: hope's strength, resteeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, we must see all in nothingness... before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ --Diamond Dragons (series)
Anyone involved in explaining science like this should never say "it's only a theory". You mean "it's just an idea" or at most a hypothesis. A theory is backed by the highest level of evidence we have.
Yeah. But something's just am assumption can lead to light being shed on what's assumed, leading to the realization that in fact they're on to something credible. But w/o "facts" to support, I still think guessing leads to.logic.
Theories are not truths. They are often wrong. Right now the problem with science is current theories are built on several other unproven theories as their basis. Many areas of theory are basically gobbledygook fantasy at this point. We will likely find that many decades of theory were a rabbit hole that ultimately distracted us from truth. And that's not a problem on its own, because figuring out we're wrong leads to truth. The problem comes when people treat theory as empirical truth to the point that progress can't be made because of those theories treated as truth. And in a way, holding on to those theories holds us back. What is really needed is a revolution of new thinking....something we're not going to get with the current state of theories being treated as fact. Theories must always be treated as if they are potentially wrong paths of thinking, even if they do ultimately turn out to be true. There's no harm in challenging a theory. There is harm in solidifying a theory to behave as fact.
I mean to be a projection something has to be projected. Also, step outside the solar system and look in and now we are a projection you are seeing, considering looking at anything is actually looking back in time. Even if it is so small you can't perceive it, the person your eye is seeing took time to see.
I mean I agree with relativity and that moving at constant speed and being stationary are literally the same, but could you use the CMB to find your absolute speed by calculating the redshift (in theory not necessarily in practice)?
No, you can't find your absolute speed. You can only find your speed relative to the CBM. But the CBM is a reference system as good as any other inertial reference system (say the center of the local cluster).
If you were to be able to completely zero out your velocity with the universe, the possible outcome could be that you effectively see the universe pass by you and decay in the blink of an eye. We have no idea how fast the universe is ultimately moving, but it's possible it's moving at many times the speed of light. So if you consider that time moves slower for a person travelling faster than everyone else, such as in a rocket ship, then the fabric of space itself could be much much older. Trillions of years older, but not older as in it came before, but older as in time is technically passing faster for it than us. That could also explain virtual particles. Maybe it takes billions of times longer than we realize for a virtual particle to actually pop into existence, but because time is moving slower for us because of our speed, it seems to happen all the time. These particles may also not be actually popping into existence at all, but rather, our universe is merely zipping through the fabric of space at such a speed, that we're constantly picking up free floating particles from outside of our universe, that makes them seem to pop into existence. The virtual particles may also merely be decay of space over time. Again, trillions of years passing for every year to us. These things might not make much practical difference, but maybe humanities ultimate end goal is to find a way to truly zero out its velocity in space, and at that point, we would effectively see the universe end right before our eyes, and maybe another one come into existence, and maybe even learn the true nature of the fabric of the universe. Things we missed because we're moving too fast to meaningfully interact or understand.
So, the case may be that the shadow is a 2D projection of the body, which is itself a 3D projection of the mind, which is a 4D projection of the soul, which is a 5D projection of... who knows.
Maybe…i always thought a big problem with the infinite existence would be boredom…so a way to combat that is this short “life” we have, where we don’t know what we experienced before our birth nor what comes after our death…it’s a comforting way to look at…but we can’t say for sure !!!
@@koala323ro I wouldn't be bored. There is always some thing to create. I mean, we are not alone. There are new experiences every where. ...or, death is scary. I for one, don't know what comes after death. So I just...have fun. Because life is too short, and too beautiful.
I just think there are some questions that will never be answered. I remember I was shocked beyond belief when many years ago Stephen Hawking said " In 20 years we will know EVERYTHING ". Mankind trying to fathom his own existence and the Cosmos around him is fascinating, but goodness me, I felt that was a rather arrogant if not ignorant statement from Professor Hawking. This Universe is mind boggling and beyond comprehension just in its sheer size, and to be honest when I see documentaries or look at books or photographs about it, I am in complete awe. I cannot help but be reminded of a line of scripture in the Bible that states ......"For the heavens declare the Glory of God".....Thank you for this video. We should always endeavour to learn as much as we can.
I say this may simply be over complicating things. Our perception of motion is not simply observed through visual cues. The overall perception of your position in space is called proprietion. We also have sensation for touch, as well as sensations for motions like push and tug, mainly in your inner ear. Interestingly we can put ourself in situations where our position in space is the opposite of normal, and our body's will adapt (such as when hanging upside down), yet still, you could probably be able to tell what's happening.
"Proprioception" - Proprioception, otherwise known as kinesthesia, is your body's ability to sense movement, action, and location. It's present in every muscle movement you have. Without proprioception, you wouldn't be able to move without thinking about your next step.
I love these Astrum videos. And as much as I love these ideas, I’m always troubled that there is a flawed slippage in metaphors. We are not the unreal shadow anymore than we cause black holes. The metaphors are not stable when you change the terms this way. It’s a failure of the mathematics of metaphor. Metaphors require given conditions only hold with stable conditions, just as with any other equation. You’ve changed the condition of the shadow metaphor, so it no longer serves to accurately convey what is going on.
The fact remains that if what you perceive as “you” makes a decision and suffers the consequences of that decision, “you” are real and what you perceive is real. Being in a simulation doesn’t preclude us from responsibility, consequences, happiness, anguish, or pain. Thus, I would argue, the entire debate on “are we or aren’t we” is moot. Unless being a or being in a simulation fundamentally alters how we interact with the universe in a detrimental way, it’s an intriguing thought exercise and nothing more.
when i was a kid, i inserted a piece of metal into a electrical wall socket! yeah, i survived to tell the tale. I can testify i've experience electricity. Now, where do i insert a piece of metal into to experience a space-time curvature?
This channel is so perfect 🖤 The principle of Galilean relativity is really interesting through the approach of 3d animation. If you were to animate a car moving straight through a 3d space, you would animate the space around it to create the illusion that the car is moving forward. But if you look closer it stays at the same position on the screen and the perception of movement is created in the mind. Removing any animation to the wheels and any background but place an object that seems to grow bigger as the animation progresses and you can’t tell if it’s the car moving forward or the object moving closer
Tonight I’ve learned that the only thing I can ever know for sure is that I’m really glad I took those couple of Xanax before I stumbled across this channel. This is manageable. This is mostly manageable information. This is not an existential crisis. This is an existential challenge…
Notice relativity quite often. When I stop my vehicle sometimes, and other vehicles are still moving to my key or right, I get the sensation in rolling backwards or forwards and slam on my brakes only to realize I’m not moving at all.
The bit about acceleration and gravity essentially being the same. That helped me understand why time dilation occurs with gravity, It makes me wonder. Does acceleration affect the curvature of of spacetime? An object resting or moving obviously affects the local curvature. But without increasing mass, does increasing acceleration cause the curvature to curve more than it already is? I feel like I’m coming as close as I ever have to finally grasping what exactly spacetime is.
@@MADSK_LLZ an object gains more mass the faster it travels, that's why its impossible to travel at the speed of light as the objects mass becomes infinitely bigger the closer to light speed it gets
@@rennoc577 yeah I get your point, it doesn't make a difference if we see it as mass increasing or the resistance to motion, same thing in this thought process It is commonly known that, if you accelerate an object, its mass will increase; however, to understand why this phenomenon occurs, we mustn’t think of the object’s mass increasing. Instead, we should think of its energy. In physics, mass is just simply locked up energy. We call this type of mass, ‘inertial mass.’ Essentially, inertial mass is the amount of resistance that a physical object has to any change in its motion (this includes the resistance that a body has to acceleration or to directional changes).
Im confused... A black hole literally _is_ curvature in space/time. So reducing the curvature and seeing the black hole shrink seems perfectly natural. The analogy doesnt seem to hold up; Its not like a shadow or a footprint because those are consequences of something entirely different. I know its overly simplified, but the ol blanket with marbles on it to represent gravitational wells can be useful. You put a marble on and it forms a divot, if you push up from the bottom and flatten it out then assume the marble disappears, that would be... weird, and I think thats what this video seems to be implying this is like? but as far as Im aware when a black hole forms, any marble that could have existed is obliterated, its just the blanket pulled down to an infinitesimally small point. Push the blanket back up and there isnt anything left. (I think this is still strange, because what exactly happened to the marble? but I think that speaks more to the information paradox than an odd footprint analogy.)
The footprint analogy and the information paradox are closely related. Essentially, what the footprint analogy is stating is that erasing the footprint, erases you. Now, if the mass is truly gone in a black hole. We have serious issues with our understandings of physics that need corrected. If what you’re saying turns out to be true. It could be possible that the mass isn’t simply just obliterated. It could quite literally be that it is exiting our fabric of reality, and entering another one. Black holes might be how new universes are formed. Our entire universe might just be the inside of a larger black hole. Mandelbrot fractals come to mind. You can zoom in nearly infinitely, and still observe immense detail. We could be within a long generation of universes born within black holes, which themselves might form black holes, and so on.
@@gravoc857 TBH, science doesn't know enough about Black holes to even make guesses about what's going on inside. We can use particle accelerators to recombine some of the fundamental forces. If our puny power levels can do that, it's entirely possible that a Black hole puts ALL the forces back together. No telling what might be possible. But if the hypothesis about the one force breaking apart randomly, and if how it breaks changes all the constants and laws, then what's possible inside could be completely unthinkable to us.
I’m confused too, but my understanding is that saying that a curvature in space time causes mass is just as valid as saying that mass causes a curvature in spacetime.
@@higginsisaac It’s really wild to think that we could theoretically create matter by curving spacetime. Or more precisely, the various different quantum fields that permeates through our universe.
Maybe we aren't our shadows, but we are being followed by remnants of black holes trying to take us in, and the light is the only thing pulling us back.
The answer to the question "are we real" is "yes we are real". Everything that experiences a "reality" is real, because it's happening. Is our universe the fundamental reality? we don't know that. We may be in a simulation. But that does not mean we are not real. We, the universe around us, and a possible super-universe around our own, is what we call reality, and we are a part of it.
I very much appreciate your effort in making these videos, I find space and specifically black holes and Hawking radiation to be mindblowingly fascinating and can't get enough of the explanations that help me wrap my head around them. One minor, but, in my opinion, relevant criticism: As scientifically accurate as you're striving to be in this video, I wish you wouldn't then conclude by saying that this was all "just a theory". Obviously, most people know what you mean, but when in this day and age, there are people seriously arguing that gravity and evolution are "just theories" and therefore on the same level as other biased and scientifically unfounded attempts of explaining our reality, I would much prefer if you used the word "hypothesis" instead ;)
@@ricomartinez6145 My point is that "theory" and "hypothesis" are not synonyms in scientific discourse, but they are being used synonymously in every day speech. Your answer is exactly why I brought this up. A scientific theory has been repeatedly tested and is supported by lots of data. It is therefore not merely an educated guess, but it is substantiated by independent experimentation and evidence and is widely accepted as explanation for an occurrence by the scientific community. It is as close to a fact as you can get in science. A hypothesis is basically a guess that hasn't been tested at all. It is what people usually mean when they say "just a theory", but in science, a hypothesis is light years away from being a theory (although every hypothesis has the potential of becoming a theory one day).
Really interesting video, but I feel the analogy could be refined a bit. Based on how I understood the video, the theory of the curvature of space influencing mass (rather than mass causing the curvature of space) wouldn’t imply that we are the “shadows” or “footprints” rather than the “foot.” It would imply that we are the foot, but our footprints and the sand that forms the footprint have influence over us, rather than us imprinting on the sand. And that’s something I think people need to understand more in general - we have less control over our lives than we think. Tough to accept but also liberating to let go of what we can’t control.
Sorry, speed as one of the functions of motion (s,v,a,m etc) seems the wrong one to recite when speaking of Galilean Relativity. Speed excludes a directional component, which must be considered, must it not? What happens if your experiment starts listing left? The results will differ, yet your predictions will be unable to account for it.
Why?, there's no force contrasting it, no friction and unless that object would have a change in velocity, but the object isn't accelerating therefore no.
Excellent science led presentation on Plato's allegory of the cave. I am surprised that you did not use that in a video heavily laden with the philosophy of the story. Cheers 🤙
The best ride that Kennywood Park in Pittsburgh ever had was the Roder. It was exactly the same ride you shown. The floor dropped while it spun in circles so fast that you wouldn't fall. You stuck to the wall. It was great. Wish they would bring that back.
I've always had a problem with the simulation theory. Say the universe is a simulation, we would still be real. As real as we are existing as an amalgamation of waves propagating through space time. Say we are a simulation by a super intelligent race of aliens, I fail to see how that makes us any less real. My reality is real to me at least, for the simple reason that I think therefore I am.
Are you sure you are the one thinking tho? what if something is thinking trough you, we dont really Know how thoughts are formed (sorry for my english)
"i think, therefore i am"
@@zakariaelhimer1325 if something is thinking through me then I would be apart of said being and still be me
It changes everything . Alot of pi$$Ed off humans knowing we've been lied to
@@damientonkin bro exactly
Thank you Astrum, been looking for yet another existential crisis to obsess about before bed.
Hahajjahahaha
🤣
I thought that was my job?
Im so confused, everyone seems to be freaking out in a calm way while I dont see anything weird or makes me question reality. I wanna be involved too🥲
Gotta fuel tha nihilism somehow
this reminds me of the Platonic allegory of the cave. we can never really know what exists beyond our potentially limited perception. our reality may not truly be what is happening, but I don’t know that we’ll ever be able to see beyond those shadows on the cave wall.
Hey! I was trying to remember the Allegory of the Cave to draw as a parallel here! Thanks for the reminder, Nate 😊!
I see this less as a break-down of causality and more as a break-down of the *analogy* of the curvature of space being like a shadow or a footprint. What this is saying is that the mass doesn't cause the curvature and the curvature doesn't cause the mass. The mass is the curvature and the curvature is the mass.
this is correct.
Instead of looking at it as curvature, I look at it as displacement.
People think of the 3D analogy the wrong way. It seems most physicists don't even grasp it. ALL mass is altering the spacetime field. Every single particle. So it's not one 'dimple' like the diagrams are showing. The mass is bending into ITSELF at the very nucleus of every single atom. What we perceive is the net result of all those curvatures combined. And also remember, it's denting inside itself. It's not a 'dimple', it's pulling in spacetime from every direction.
Does that alone not change how this phenomenon is perceived?
@@Alondro77 most of these visuals are simple representations of math though. obviously the universe isnt on a 2d plane.
_" The mass is the curvature and the curvature is the mass."_
If so then every atom is the size of the universe. Because if you had 2 atoms a gazillion light years apart & nothing else in the universe, then eventually they would collide. Even if you take into account dark energy the curvature still affects them. Therefore the curavture is a gazillion light years wide => the atom is the size of the universe.
If the question is: "Am I real?" the answer is still, "Yes." as the projection exists just as much as what is projecting it, otherwise neither exists in reality. A shadow isn't a great example, as a shadow is the absence of something; clearly this isn't the case with our existence, as we have proven that mass and matter exist. A better analogy comes from screen projectors. We may be equivalent to the light that shines on a projector screen from the projector. That pattern of light exists, therefore we exist, otherwise, we would not be.
ur analogy makes much more sense, i was so confused with the shadow one. however i am still confused as to how we could be just projections when we have mass and are made of matter?
@@lena-jh7vi howdy! The idea of the video is to explain how our idea of a foot making footprint could be reversed, which at first sounds like crazy talk, right?
The foot, however, represents *mass*, whereas the footprint represents *space time* and its conformity to mass. Spacetime will bend around mass, any mass, but the larger the mass the bigger the effect. Gravity is the result of this. You know the model where a flexible sheet has a ball in the middle and the sheet bends? That's space time, and the ball is mass of any kind. The well that forms is the gravitational well.
Now, what our discoveries of black holes *might* suggest, is that instead of *mass* causing space time to bend and warp, it is actually that warpage that forms the mass within. The example in the video is good, as it demonstrates that squeezing down the stretch in the fabric of space time would also, theoretically, squeeze down anything inside. Additionally, the mathematical conclusion that hawking radiation does *not* rely on previously existing matter or mass to come into existence shows us that matter does indeed show reliance on the bends in space time.
Therefore, our existence may be the result of space time casting its "projection" on existence, simply forming things within those bends that result in things like us. I'm no expert, but I am an analyst, so take this all with a grain of salt and more than a little alcohol!
I hope I explained well, this stuff is difficult!
Have we proven mass and matter exist? Solipsism says the only thing we can be certain of is that one’s own mind exist, anything beyond that could just be all in our heads.
@@slapmyfunkybass yes, because imperial evidence proves that mass and matter exist to our known laws of physics. Even as a projection, matter and mass *must* exist because otherwise they could not be measured. The very idea that we only know our mind exists breaks the logic because then the world is our mind and therefore exists.
@@SideBit SLapmyfunkybass is just playing philosophical devils advocate. Solipsism is quite the philosophical mind bender. But personally i couldnt even begin to imagine it as a true possibility. Why would you hurt yourself? Everyone experiences pain and or "evil" at some point. Regardless of mass and physics if you were the only existence and the rest of us were projections of that mind then that would make you "God" technically.
Thanks!
I've never had an existential crisis delivered in such a calming manner, thank you good sir.
Feel like this is not really worth getting a existential crisis over, reality is in the end not a consept in a book but the life you live right now.
If i told you you that the universe was actually all inside the ahole of dinosaur, it would also not change anyting at all, in any way.
but i it is fun to think about
@@MouseGoat Fragile minds can get an existential crisis from watching a praying mantis mating ritual. We have grown weak.
@@MouseGoat So if I'm in a perfectly DARK box, I am everything? No shadow no air, no one hears Me suffocating. But nothing has happened until Some-one else opens it & looks in. Now They cast a shadow: am I that DARK God that controls that person(s)? It's that Filo Sofie thing. G'dluk w/the nonsense.
@@robertakerman3570 ...pretty you you just made this guys point, actually.
It mike make a difference.what kind of dinosaur u thinkin? Could u be more specific about the hole too
It’s so interesting to me how the more fundamental you get in discussing the nature(s) of mechanical causality / physics it can seem to have deep philosophical implications
That’s because ‘Physics’ as a subject is an artificial construct of the human mind.
Philosophy is the “love of knowledge/wisdom” after all. 🙂
Because it is philosophy, a LOT of modern science is purely “what if” unanswerable questions, not really science
Andrew - Because people base their entire BELEIFS on it. Sometimes even their life's and careers . We put so much EMOTION and intension on being right.. And run with that as the stable of everything and anything. This is why religion has the upper hand. Because we don't need to know everything. We just know that their is a greater power or mystery to life that defies much of our explanation. And that we have certain moral, ethical, and spiritual teachings that are implied in how to live happier and better lives, while being in harmony with that all powerful being. And helps us to restore in some form of complete oneness after this life... In other words why do you need to focus on black holes? What is really more important in this world. And we call these people geniuses!?!?!?!
@@Cat-ql7jm There is no proof of a greater power or gods other than mother nature itself
I was told this by a very smart man. He said "if u want to know the secrets of reality look from within as well as from without." He was stating that look at a star for example. They are created from a gathering of matter like we are a formation of cells. The largest scale of the universe explains everything in the smallest scale as well as in between. We are the universe and it is all manifested. The answers to understanding are from within ur own mind u just need to open ur perspective to see.
I agree with your statement on the organizational scales. good point
Did you see that representation of the biggest scale of the universe ? The way matter is arranged strangely reminds us of the neuro paths of the brain.
This is exactly how I been feeling
As Above so Below. As Within so Without. We are the reflection of the highest light.
before using knowledge, determine the nature of knowledge. epistemology.
if knowledge is unknowable (epistemological solipsism) beyond the self, then you can determine the real value of astrum videos. for instance, the closing that certainty is somehow comforting.. where there is certainty, consideration is absent. i'd rather perpetual consideration than perpetual certainty, wouldn't it seem?
So you're telling me we, as a potential shadow of a higher dimension, managed to gain consciousness? Wild stuff man
We did not managed to gain consciousness, The dimension we are shadowing did. Just like your own shadow seems to be moving on its own so are we.
I have never felt scared being a shadow (I even have a black morphsuit)
@@ValkyRiver hey even if youre a shadow youre still you
😂
D. Money. Man
Wild stuff indeed
No matter what medium your conscious experience takes place through, it is still a conscious experience, and that is the beauty of it. It does not matter if you are a shadow, a simulation, or a puppet, if you are aware, then that is a gift.
Thank you. To me there is no difference and life is not suddenly unbearingly disturbing. Neat video but I see the title as clickbait.
I think therefore I therefore
If it is a simulation or otherwise an illusion it is a completely convincing one.
@@alancham4 The whole idea of all of this being a simulation is a thought experiment, i think. Afterall, how does knowing it is a sim really change anything? Tomorrow the sun will rise and water will still be wet.
A robot doesn't feel itself consciousness, but we do. We always try to understand universe as a subject, as if, we were put here from somewhere outside. If we, made of universe particles, have the feeling of 'I', which no complex biology can't give, maybe whole universe is conscious. Basically understanding what am 'I', can answer what is everything. It's just another POV.
Funny how this kinda falls in line with the "We are just dreams of a slumbering god" mythology.
Also, I don't find it concerning at all.
It doesn't really matter which is true, it won't really make a practical difference.
Nothing would actually be any different except I would know about it.
Like you said, I will still think and feel etc.
What is "real" anyway?
It's what your mind makes real.
If I was in a virtual reality and felt the wind on my arm that's not real wind...
But the feeling is still real, is it not?
The part about the wind in VR is real to YOU. If someone is just watching you, they won't experience it, so then the wind is not real to them. So now you've end up with 2 real persons experiencing something that is real for 1 person but not the other. Not that anything is wrong with this, but it's interesting to think about.
I mean ive always said to people who say “We are just dreams of a slumbering god” that if that were true, might as well make the dream a good one
The reason you don’t feel real is because we can only see 7 colors, and only comprehend 3D form and space.
I theorize the soul/consciousness is not 3D. The soul/consciousness clearly is not 1D or 2D either, as we can see and comprehend those. But the soul/consciousness is something we cannot see or comprehend. For all of history, people have reported and acknowledged the spiritual, the soul, and spirits. But we all acknowledge we cannot see them. Some people do see spirits, but not like a opaque waking Human man. People see spirits in various different forms but usually they never see spirits. They only see the effects they have on the surroundings. Sometimes spirits can be heard, or move objects. The reason we can’t see them though is because they do not have 3D forms. They exist in 4D or higher, their forms can’t be comprehended by our brains. They don’t even register because we do not have the capabilities to recognize anything higher than 3D. But we can study them by their effects on the surroundings. They exist within the Laws of Physics, which means invisibility can only be explained by colors and forms that our brains can not register. This is what happens to animals who can’t see certain colors or forms, they will see nothing, or it will be invisible. The same goes for us. Don’t tell me that if we can coexist with 1D 2D and 3D , that there isn’t also 4D and 5D objects etc. It’s just we haven’t evolved to comprehend that far yet. We are mentally limited still. However no one can deny that the spiritual has been acknowledged for all time. It is because we exist multidimensionally. We are 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D and so on… But our brain only can see and comprehend 3D and below. The soul is a 4D (or higher) part of our self. The human body is 3D, it is the mass it is the object, but we also exist in higher dimensions even though we cannot see them. This is why I truly believe in the soul. Because it is real, we just cannot see or comprehend it, but it has always been acknowledged and felt and known instinctually to be real. That’s because it is part of our natural body. Our body is not just physical. It is multi dimensional and also our body can be projected in 4D and when it is, that is what the soul is… The 4D self. This is what the concept is of spirituality, higher dimensions are not like Heaven or Hell. It is simply 1D 2D 3D 4D and so on. We have 3D comprehension so far. If we ever evolve above and move to 4D comprehension and form, you can say we have “ascended” or reached “god hood” But it is really not that, it’s just adding an extra dimension of comprehension like 4D comprehension. Each time a new dimension is comprehensively unlocked, you will be opened up to a whole new dimension to see the Universe in. More colors more options for shapes and forms, more options on movement, more options on perception/sight, more options on communication etc. Everything widens and broadens up each time a new comprehensive dimension is added. This is what spirituality really is! This theory of mine meshes Science and Spirituality together. This is the science behind the powerful/deep emotions that the experience of adding a new comprehensive layer adds. This is what spirituality is trying to grasp at in the dark. Spirituality is an intuitive and instinctual acknowledgement that there is more layers of comprehension for us to achieve. Unfortunately in our lifetime we will never be able to see in 4D, but if we could, it is 100% possible and 100% would happen that we would see shapes, colors, light, movement we have NEVER seen before, that always existed right beside us, but we couldn’t see it because our brains cannot register anything beyond 3D. This can be proven when you put flowers under Ultra Violet light. When you put flower petals under UV light, you see there are patterns on white rose petals that you could never see if you were only using your bare eyes. Patterns on flowers exist every day, but we never see them. We just see white roses, but those same white roses have patterns all over their petals, and reflect light patterns for Bees and bugs, but we would never know that because our sensory functions and comprehension are extremely limited. We can only comprehend 1D, 2D, 3D and only see 7 colors. Don’t tell me that there aren’t things we cannot see. If you research the full spectrum of all colors in existence, you will see that is only seeing 7 colors accounts for about less than 0.01% of all colors that DO exist. So do not, do noooooooooot tell me that there aren’t things in existence that are invisible to us, right now. Because there is.
Yeah we've all seen the Matrix dude. You can stop paraphrasing Morpheus and trying to pass it off as your own 'wisdom' now.
Yes. Your experience is a real experience. A real dream, a real what ever you wast to call it.
What the Buddhist call real is " not changing". That there is awareness, that is ever present to awareness.
What would "not awareness" feel like to awareness? Nothing at all, it would not register at all to awareness.
No death, just the thought of it.
No past or future, just the thought of it. Eternally here and now.
No i or you. As the ego (sens of separate self) can dissolve or be recognized as a process identified to.
Yeah. Sweet dream
When the question goes from being "Am I real?" to the simple contrasting answer to that question being "I am reality", do you then take something complicated and multifaceted and reduce it down to something tangible and observable as fact. We are as much the Universe as the Universe is us so in order to understand what we are, we must first understand what it is.
That is a very eloquent way to express such a fundamental truth of life.
Who's asking?
This is what I think.
I theorize the soul/consciousness is not 3D. The soul/consciousness clearly is not 1D or 2D either, as we can see and comprehend those. But the soul/consciousness is something we cannot see or comprehend. For all of history, people have reported and acknowledged the spiritual, the soul, and spirits. But we all acknowledge we cannot see them. Some people do see spirits, but not like a opaque waking Human man. People see spirits in various different forms but usually they never see spirits. They only see the effects they have on the surroundings. Sometimes spirits can be heard, or move objects. The reason we can’t see them though is because they do not have 3D forms. They exist in 4D or higher, their forms can’t be comprehended by our brains. They don’t even register because we do not have the capabilities to recognize anything higher than 3D. But we can study them by their effects on the surroundings. They exist within the Laws of Physics, which means invisibility can only be explained by colors and forms that our brains can not register. This is what happens to animals who can’t see certain colors or forms, they will see nothing, or it will be invisible. The same goes for us. Don’t tell me that if we can coexist with 1D 2D and 3D , that there isn’t also 4D and 5D objects etc. It’s just we haven’t evolved to comprehend that far yet. We are mentally limited still. However no one can deny that the spiritual has been acknowledged for all time. It is because we exist multidimensionally. We are 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D and so on… But our brain only can see and comprehend 3D and below. The soul is a 4D (or higher) part of our self. The human body is 3D, it is the mass it is the object, but we also exist in higher dimensions even though we cannot see them. This is why I truly believe in the soul. Because it is real, we just cannot see or comprehend it, but it has always been acknowledged and felt and known instinctually to be real. That’s because it is part of our natural body. Our body is not just physical. It is multi dimensional and also our body can be projected in 4D and when it is, that is what the soul is… The 4D self. This is what the concept is of spirituality, higher dimensions are not like Heaven or Hell. It is simply 1D 2D 3D 4D and so on. We have 3D comprehension so far. If we ever evolve above and move to 4D comprehension and form, you can say we have “ascended” or reached “god hood” But it is really not that, it’s just adding an extra dimension of comprehension like 4D comprehension. Each time a new dimension is comprehensively unlocked, you will be opened up to a whole new dimension to see the Universe in. More colors more options for shapes and forms, more options on movement, more options on perception/sight, more options on communication etc. Everything widens and broadens up each time a new comprehensive dimension is added. This is what spirituality really is! This theory of mine meshes Science and Spirituality together. This is the science behind the powerful/deep emotions that the experience of adding a new comprehensive layer adds. This is what spirituality is trying to grasp at in the dark. Spirituality is an intuitive and instinctual acknowledgement that there is more layers of comprehension for us to achieve. Unfortunately in our lifetime we will never be able to see in 4D, but if we could, it is 100% possible and 100% would happen that we would see shapes, colors, light, movement we have NEVER seen before, that always existed right beside us, but we couldn’t see it because our brains cannot register anything beyond 3D. This can be proven when you put flowers under Ultra Violet light. When you put flower petals under UV light, you see there are patterns on white rose petals that you could never see if you were only using your bare eyes. Patterns on flowers exist every day, but we never see them. We just see white roses, but those same white roses have patterns all over their petals, and reflect light patterns for Bees and bugs, but we would never know that because our sensory functions and comprehension are extremely limited. We can only comprehend 1D, 2D, 3D and only see 7 colors. Don’t tell me that there aren’t things we cannot see. If you research the full spectrum of all colors in existence, you will see that is only seeing 7 colors accounts for about less than 0.01% of all colors that DO exist. So do not, do noooooooooot tell me that there aren’t things in existence that are invisible to us, right now. Because there is.
I would rather say, with the Buddha, that to understand what it is we must understand what we are.
Yeah, we are reality. Now. Wanna help fix it?
This reminds me of videos that project 4D objects into 3D to help understand them. If we pushed a ball into a 2D world, 2D people would first see a dot appear, that then became a growing circle until the ball is inserted halfway.
Similarly we and everything around us could be 3D projections of 4D objects. I mean, if spacetime curves, then where does it curve into if not into a fourth spacial dimension?
Haha you seen that video too eh 🤣
If we stay within the analogy so that the information of the 3d universe depends on its 2d surface then the information of the 4d universe emerges from its 3d volume.
link to video plss
Couch Warrior you’re soo badass!!
@@couchwarrior2449 what a sad comment
The fact that my home city was pictured as u asked “am I real?” Really just broke my brain
what up Baltimore
This is the best and most concise explanation of the holographic theory that I have encountered online so far. Thank you for making this video.
I feel that its so indistinguishable that the reality is that we aren't real and its all a projection or dream, much like philosophers postulated back in the day. It's all the more reason to live life as a dream and have the adventure you've always wanted and it points to the spiritual growth that can be achieved by humanity if we all embraced this concept and lived our lives around it.
No.
@@andybaldman thanks man, really added to the conversation 🙄
No woo woo.
And yet people mock others for believing God as they themselves embrace the notion that nothing real exists... excuse me while I and my other 12th dimensional beings laugh in diagonal purple thunder.
You can't use words such as 'spiritual growth' 'life as a dream' 'philosophers' to explain to a crowd of scientific hobby/passion. As soon as they hear this they'll WANT it to be woo-woo in their heads since most stuff that uses those words IS woo-woo. It's just how the mind works, it likes to validate it's past experiences and what it has heard from others.
Fascinating. Years ago, I was really "into" spirituality. I stopped shortly after I realized that what it was teaching (if one really considers both what was presented, and what can be inferred) was that our "selves", our consciousness (and beyond) is NOT within our mind/brain (in other words, inside our skulls), but that we are actually OUTSIDE, being a part of the entire Universe. This explains why "out of body" experiences are instantaneous...and the essence of the Universe (by definition, our _selves_ ) create a focal point which we perceive as our brain/mind.
This video made me remember all that, from 40+ years ago.
same here. we are not the body but the body and mind is in us.
Or beyond the entire Universe
What has changed, why are you not “into” spirituality anymore?
You could say we are separations/splinters off of the Universe. We are conscious separately of only ourself because we are separations. It insinuates that the Universe is conscious as a whole, and we are just leaves plucked from its branches, causing individual consciousness.
*take what i say lightly, I am attempting to mesh the spiritual and the scientific in one comment*
Here we go..
I theorize the soul/consciousness is not 3D. The soul/consciousness clearly is not 1D or 2D either, as we can see and comprehend those. But the soul/consciousness is something we cannot see or comprehend. For all of history, people have reported and acknowledged the spiritual, the soul, and spirits. But we all acknowledge we cannot see them. Some people do see spirits, but not like a opaque waking Human man. People see spirits in various different forms but usually they never see spirits. They only see the effects they have on the surroundings. Sometimes spirits can be heard, or move objects. The reason we can’t see them though is because they do not have 3D forms. They exist in 4D or higher, their forms can’t be comprehended by our brains. They don’t even register because we do not have the capabilities to recognize anything higher than 3D. But we can study them by their effects on the surroundings. They exist within the Laws of Physics, which means invisibility can only be explained by colors and forms that our brains can not register. This is what happens to animals who can’t see certain colors or forms, they will see nothing, or it will be invisible. The same goes for us. Don’t tell me that if we can coexist with 1D 2D and 3D , that there isn’t also 4D and 5D objects etc. It’s just we haven’t evolved to comprehend that far yet. We are mentally limited still. However no one can deny that the spiritual has been acknowledged for all time. It is because we exist multidimensionally. We are 1D 2D 3D 4D 5D 6D and so on… But our brain only can see and comprehend 3D and below. The soul is a 4D (or higher) part of our self. The human body is 3D, it is the mass it is the object, but we also exist in higher dimensions even though we cannot see them. This is why I truly believe in the soul. Because it is real, we just cannot see or comprehend it, but it has always been acknowledged and felt and known instinctually to be real. That’s because it is part of our natural body. Our body is not just physical. It is multi dimensional and also our body can be projected in 4D and when it is, that is what the soul is… The 4D self. This is what the concept is of spirituality, higher dimensions are not like Heaven or Hell. It is simply 1D 2D 3D 4D and so on. We have 3D comprehension so far. If we ever evolve above and move to 4D comprehension and form, you can say we have “ascended” or reached “god hood” But it is really not that, it’s just adding an extra dimension of comprehension like 4D comprehension. Each time a new dimension is comprehensively unlocked, you will be opened up to a whole new dimension to see the Universe in. More colors more options for shapes and forms, more options on movement, more options on perception/sight, more options on communication etc. Everything widens and broadens up each time a new comprehensive dimension is added. This is what spirituality really is! This theory of mine meshes Science and Spirituality together. This is the science behind the powerful/deep emotions that the experience of adding a new comprehensive layer adds. This is what spirituality is trying to grasp at in the dark. Spirituality is an intuitive and instinctual acknowledgement that there is more layers of comprehension for us to achieve. Unfortunately in our lifetime we will never be able to see in 4D, but if we could, it is 100% possible and 100% would happen that we would see shapes, colors, light, movement we have NEVER seen before, that always existed right beside us, but we couldn’t see it because our brains cannot register anything beyond 3D. This can be proven when you put flowers under Ultra Violet light. When you put flower petals under UV light, you see there are patterns on white rose petals that you could never see if you were only using your bare eyes. Patterns on flowers exist every day, but we never see them. We just see white roses, but those same white roses have patterns all over their petals, and reflect light patterns for Bees and bugs, but we would never know that because our sensory functions and comprehension are extremely limited. We can only comprehend 1D, 2D, 3D and only see 7 colors. Don’t tell me that there aren’t things we cannot see. If you research the full spectrum of all colors in existence, you will see that is only seeing 7 colors accounts for about less than 0.01% of all colors that DO exist. So do not, do noooooooooot tell me that there aren’t things in existence that are invisible to us, right now. Because there is.
This was an outstandingly well put together video discussion.
I have never seen anyone explain thse topics in such an understandable and self relating manner. Thank You! This was amazing.
This makes a little more sense. I picture Hawking Radiation as the “rubber sheet” (spacetime) interacting with the mass directly like “friction.” I picture the rubber sheet being pulled or stretched (as our universe is not static) as well as mass “rolling” across the surface, causing energy to be stripped away and/or left behind.
Think of a bowling ball trapped in a “gravity well” of a sheet, and that sheet moved underneath it like the way a belt sander would. Over time, the sheet (durability permitting) would wear down the bowling ball. It would take a long time, but that is the gist of it. The Hawking Radiation would just be the product of this process, where the “rubber meets the road” so to speak.
The implication to this, would be that every object that has mass in the universe would give off Hawking Radiation to some extent proportional to it’s gravitational interaction with spacetime, relative to the surface area the mass/energy is spread out over. The higher the concentration of mass the greater the friction relative to the “contact patch” with the surrounding spacetime.
Thats a great analogy!
I had an analogy of a white hole replacing time with space, it be the oposite of a singularity, were the farther away you move from it the less space there is and matter is pushed out, like a plane
I wonder if hawking radiation could be captured and used as a source of energy, like light can be?
@@theterminaldave I imagine that is possible, as the Hawking Radiation is just fancy description of a process for photon emission. I am not sure of the distribution or energy density of these photons, as black holes aren’t particularly “luminous”, generally speaking. When I see discussions of using energy from blackholes, I see them trying to convert rotational energy or spin from the blackhole as a way to effectively generate power. There is probably more than one way to skin Schrödinger’s Cat.
I love this.
This reminds me of the theory of the holographic universe. Also reminds me of the idea that we are 3D shadows of 4D or even more dimensional worlds
Nothing here implies that we aren’t real, just that our reality is more complex than we realize
3:34 - The equivalence principle applies only locally. The acceleration due to the rocket wouldn't manifest the differential acceleration (tidal effect) but the acceleration due to gravity would. So NO! There IS a way (for a macroscopic object like a person) to tell the difference!
Very good point!
there are so many mind bending ideas and observations about the nature of time, the expansion of space, and how these two relate to gravity.. just floating around right now in the collective mind... like there's a profound discovery just out of reach, just waiting for the right dots to be connected...
This gets extra bonkers when I contemplate how much space is actually in between things we perceive as solid. Also plank length.
Perfect timing, just about to go to sleep, cheers
Is it you who is about to sleep or your footprint?
Sleep well homie.
@@CreamAle yeah sleep tight don't let the bedbugs bite
Lol yeah same with me everytime
@@ninjanutzforfun1105 Want more Science in your life?
I warmly recommend Sci Man Dan, Sci Show and Hbomberguy.
Man I'm so glad I subscribed, all your videos just blow my mind. You strike a great balance of informing people on complex theories and tech without talking down to us. Love it.
That is making sense. When you search further into what matter is, it is far from being a solid block of anything. As a fluid element, it would be strange that it would not be part of a larger ecosystem of forces. Thanks for the video :)
I watch tons of videos on space and physics. I can comfortably say this one has blown my mind more than any other space/physics video. Wow. The paradigm shift in my perspective on black holes is immense. Thank you.
Watch life beyond series
Watch the channel"but why" the video about black holes, guaranteed to blow your mind
PBS space time?
@@pootzeketzi1233 PBS spacetime is amazing, but this video was 100% on Matt O'Dowds level. This was an excellent video, maybe the best I've seen on the subject of gravity and spacetime curvature.
“Real” is such a vague term tho. I dunno if “real” should only mean that it *physically* exists and can “only be physically interacted with”, or if “real” should just mean that it exists in “any way, shape or form.”
i.e. that digital file _obviously_ exists in _”some way, shape, or form.”_ It’s a real file that takes up storage on some hard drive, whether it be accessed from your computer internally or via the cloud connected to a server somewhere else in the world. We can’t physically TOUCH IT, but it’s definitively there, and obviously not only a figment of our imagination, for example, like with the video file of this TH-cam video stored on TH-cam’s servers.
So I guess the thing is that even if we _are_ “caused by the footprint,” that shouldn’t mean that we’re “not real,” but rather, it just means that “we” might just be one side of the coin, the other side being the curvature of spacetime.
I guess maybe me thinking this way is just helping me from having an existential crisis right now lol
Reality is a spectrum ....
I'm real but so is bugs bunny.
We're on different points of the spectrum.
Thats what I was thinking, like a shadow is still real just not something we can physically touch..
Tangible is often in there along with what’s ‘real’ because things can stretch into the metaphysical
You can apply this reasoning to thoughts. Physically we could say they’re just electrical signals and waves but what about the information. Where does information come from? And is the information any less “real” than the physical means of delivery? Some of the most beautiful works of music, art, and literature were nothing more than information in someone’s head that were made “real” for all to experience.
@@romanovmarkelyon1021 I didn't even think to that extent, but you're completely right
I am as real as the reality that defines me.
Reality is a simulation, at the very least it's a simulation of itself.
Every part of the simulation experienced by an individual is an interpretation of it's interaction.
When you touch something hot, the heat energy doesn't travel up your arm and enter you brain, it's translated through the nerve as an electrical impulse that is then interpreted by the brain to define a meaning.
But the great thing is that you aren't bound by a default interpretation. You have a conscious mind, with an imagination; you can interpret what you see and how you feel, in any way you choose.
I love this! It's like we're literally the "shadow" selves of our "higher" selves.
I don't put much weight behind this myself in serious terms but I do believe anything is possible, it could be that there are 'shadows' of us too and it just carries on forever, in both directions.
I don't think it means that. The shadow is as much the real self as the basic workings that produce it, be they bio-chemical or even deeper than this causality thing. Just like a computer programme on your screen vs. the programming and bits and bytes. The screen -- the shadow -- is the higher self, not the underlying stuff
Well it's taken you the long way around, but you've come around.
This is what Joseph, Ballum, Isiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Socrates and Plato, The Essenes (with their books of Enoch), John the Baptist all said 3000-2000 years ago in written text.
But that was stupid....right. Trust the science we say.
Bingo!
@@STho205 even the "holy" scriptures refers to god as everything around us...so I refer to my god as the Universe. Yes, seems we cyclically lose and rediscover ancient wisdom. So that we do not repeat humanities mistakes. 😮💨
Just found this channel and wanted to say, as a physics nerd, I am blown away. Keep up the great work, and don't mind if I go on a binge! ✌️
It doesn’t matter what we are. We know for sure that we exist. Who or what else could be having our thoughts? We are somewhere, and we are real.
I have found the same thing! Seems unlikely to be a coincidence.
maybe not!
This channel never fails to blow my mind!
I wish I could say this, but I'm not smart enough.
How old are you?
Are you sure IT'S blowing your mind? Or did your mind tell it to?
@@sublime4212 in order to understand the comment, someone’s mind, that person would require to acknowledge their presence or their mind. It does not provide clear evidence if said person is aware. Therefore, the comment would still be correct to a certain extent. The lack of knowledge in physics of the universe led to said mind to be blown. Therefore, it would be technically lack knowledge or understanding that has bewilder said person. They can change in due time, but at that very moment, the entity itself is blown away by the lack of knowledge and accepted they lack that knowledge.
I may be wrong though. Just a thought :D
@@HelioPopTart you're correct. I lack the knowledge and that's why I come here to learn 😃
If all this is actually how the universe works... why would it be disturbing? Learning about it didn't change anything. The system doesn't get replaced just because we know about it, no matter what Douglas Adams had to say about that. 😄
All it takes for a shadow to disappear is for the light switch to be flipped... If we are indeed a "shadow" of something "more" then who's to say all this can't just be switched off
@@jimreaper1337 You realize that's true no matter what, right? Not to make the daily existential horror any worse, but you, the planet, the whole universe could all be destroyed at the speed of light or faster for predictable causes, unpredictable causes, and the literally infinite class of unknown and unknowable causes.
@@LordMarcus i hope faster than the speed of light, because in the cosmic scheme of things the speed of light, is pretty damn slow
Good ol' optimistic nihilism :D
People who have deep meditation and say they can access spiritual "world "
What we are and see isnt real , and we are all or connected to everything
( maybe some kind of amazing advanced ilusion )
Like in our dreams ( we can see , feel , toutch , etc )
Yet can we say our dreams are a reality ?
Dreams are almost like what we call reality , yet we say its just a dream and this is reality
But our reality can be just an advanced type of dream ( liking it or not its really possible )
Thank you Astrum, great channel that doesn't mindlessly repeat keywords throughout the video like most do. You just deliver good and I teresting knowdge. Amazing
High thoughts:
Stirring a liquid with high force in a container so that one creates a sufficient acceleration in the fluid so that the floor of that container can be seen (like a whirlpool). Black holes are created by huge masses creating high acceleration of matter toward it (gravity). But the matter that isn't so heavily influenced by its gravity is able to move give off that whirl pool appearance. What if that whirl pool effect similar to stirring liquid in a container opens up the possibility that the floor of the black hole is just the container that holds the space and time of our dimension. Breaking through that might allow for passing into alternative dimensions or mirror dimensions.
This is interesting. I imagined tea being stirred in a cup. If enough force is applied to the cup of the stirred tea on the outside it could shatter the tea's reality and spill into the unknown.
Black holes are just another theory though.
@@redpillnibbler4423 Everything is 'just a theory'. We know black holes are real though, in case you are implying otherwise.
@@redpillnibbler4423 we have pictures of them dummy
I still don't get how black holes exist at all. If time slows down as you get closer to a black hole, shouldn't that mean the universe dies and the black hole evaporates before you can cross the event horizon? Just like you need infinite energy to reach the speed of light, shouldn't you need an infinite amount of time to reach the event horizon? I get that time locally flows normally, but if you were to watch the universe as you fall in, you'd see everything moving faster and faster, and eventually witness the death of the universe in whatever form it takes before you cross the event horizon.
So how the hell does anything enter a black hole at all??? Shouldn't it all be basically frozen at the event horizon from our perspective?
You are right and actually the only reason why we can't see it anymore is because the light photons become so spread out that it just fades into oblivion
@@astrumspace so how the heck does matter get inside in the first place? Is it just that everything inside the schwarzchild radius collapses into a singularity, and everything after that just hangs out at the event horizon? Or as matter builds up around the black hole, the event horizon expands and swallows up the stuff closest to it? It doesn't make sense to me, because if you need infinite time to cross a threshold, but the threshold can cross you in a finite amount of time, what even does that mean???
The more I think about black holes, the less sense they make to me lol
@@foop145 E=mc² remember that.
@@ivaerz4977 what does the energy contained within an object have to do with crossing the event horizon of a black hole?
As I understand it, as you approach the event horizon your mass effects the mass of the black hole system increasing it. This increases the size of the event horizon causing it to absorb you.
You do not enter the black hole, it swallows you a bit at a time.
This is why stars don't just vanish in. They are stopped by time at the horizon and absorbed as the black hole gains mass.
Kinda backwards really, the black hole doesn't get bigger because it ate you, it gets bigger in order to eat you.
Good topic. Good visuals. Good narration. Good voice with good pace. Astrum is Awesome! Keep up the great work. 😊🖒
this is where mathematicians start losing their grip on reality
Or is reality losing its grip on mathematicians?
@@starflyer3219 No, it's grip losing the math of the... (*ouch* now my brain hurts)
You being unable to mentally grasp or understand something doesn't make it wrong
Rex Mundi... But yet we all listen to them as if they are God. Its kind of sad when you hear a person say that life is just a bunch of numbers. You pity what's it like to live in that brain.
@@Cat-ql7jm I have more faith in math than I do in gods.
Hi Astrum! Thanks for the new video
To anyone interested in fiction/fantasy works, have a look at "Throne of the Magical Arcana".
The book uses the projection theory as a basis to build the world. Honestly, just this much can be considered a spoiler for the story.
There are some leaps in logic here but I really enjoyed the video in a writerly Lovecraftian way. On the cosmic scale there are things like red-shifting, cosmic background radiation and Hubble expansion, ideas much of astronomy is based upon, all pointing to a universe-sized arrow for time, rather than a collection of Black Holes with their own Shadow Continuity. Hawking Radiation honestly makes easy sense. Otherwise Black Holes would be eternal and functionally ‘break’ physics. Whether or not Time “stops” when the Universe reaches Heat-Death is where much of thinking seems to be now.
Thank you for keeping things on a level I can kind of understand. I try and watch the PBS videos but get lost almost immediately.
same. The PBS videos have really interesting concepts but I can never follow them and it makes me sad
Yes thank you for keeping things on a level that "steven guevara" can understand. Can you dumb it down a little so I can?
@@xenorac this is about as dumbed down as it gets and was explained brilliantly, but I can tell you from experience that it helps immensely to look up the meanings of any words or concepts you may not understand. When I started studying physics a few years back I struggled with this, and I continue learning every single day. The amount of knowledge on these subjects is endless, and can take a while to learn even basic concepts sometimes.
@Fractal Chaos I get that but presenting it in a more easily digestible way is possible. PBS just either can’t or doesn’t do that
@@warmbutteredtoast1923 PBS is not made for the uninitiated. It’s for ppl who are actively studying these subjects. It’s no coincidence that the audience can ask very specific questions that Matt will then answer to. It’s not for kids or curious ppl who may ask “but what is light made of?” or stuff like that. It’s more “here’s my calculations and the results I got differ from yours, could you explain why?”
Einstein explicitly notes that his equivalence principle is a convention. To state that there would be no difference to us between experiencing earth's gravity and being in a rocket with the appropriate momentum is an axiom of our physics, not a consequence of our physics. These philosophical differences matter when we are taking the time to speculate on what theory could mean. I believe it is important to highlight where our best judgments enter and our data depart
Glad to be early today ;)
The shadow/darkness was always there. That does make sense. Light is finite. Objects are also ultimately finite. A shadow is "cast" by blocking light to reveal the darkness that was already there.
Not scientific by my wording, but certainly observational.
"Are we shadows?"
*"Once, I was a great invincible warrior. And no one dared to stand in my way. I travelled the lands searching for a worthy opponent, until I opened the Gates of Shadows..."*
So if we're made of waves energy but were also projections made by the curvature of space, could this mean that each wave of energy that is projected is also projecting infinite dimensions(versions) of "us" ultimately creating the multiverse?
Really do not take anything this video has seriously. Pay attention all sorts of fallacies and falsehoods are so so apparent
I've heard scientists are actually considering the multiverse theory because of how particles in phyiscs work
I'm no physicist but I've actually been wondering about this. whether mass could be defined by its gravity rather than the other way around. seems most likely that both exist simultaneously rather than one "causing" the other though
Like Electromagnetic field. Presence of one field will cause presence of other field and we cannot say one is cause of another.
You can’t separate a plant from the soil or the sunlight.All are one.
How exactly? I remember in high school physics we had a law that attributed gravity as a function of mass
@@sohummohare6364 government brainwashing propaganda
@@sohummohare6364 well that's in high school. Surely this is new discovery and thus lead to new equations to be used. Maybe in the future fundamental physicists can develop an equation that can determine mass by its spacetime curvature and possibly even dark matter
It's amazing we know so much about something that has never been found. Ever hear the saying don't judge a book by its cover? We see a still photo of a black hole and make so many assumptions about how they work and what happens to matter around it, even when no one has actually observed it.
So time has an inertia and wants to move in a straight line, but gravity is like the carnival ride that curves our path in time. That's why our feet move slower through time than our heads. This manifests as a gradient in time, and 3 dimensional orbits in space
I've always thought of it this way: we live in a universe that seems infinite in many ways, the conservation of energy is relentless, the flatness of the universe, etc... but our witnessing of this is finite. I don't remember anything from before I was born, and it doesn't seem significant, and yet, like the tree falling in the woods without a witness, our finite yet infinitesimal point of observation of this infinite universe seems rather paramount for it to even exist. I am often inclined to believe that the universe is an illusion created by some innate tendency for order, such that it seems that the universe will always fill in the blanks where ever we choose to look. This construction of reality is so stringent that you cannot tell what is the chicken or the egg.
Bravo!
I can remember being born. Having never felt the cold before, it stung.
Pretty sure I can remember before then too.
@@72marshflower15 please do share more 🤔
@@elongatedmusk3132 not like in previous lives. I’m not all that sure such a thing can be done, but I’ve two distinct impressions of memory.. one of drifting through the soft lit nebulae of the galaxy and before that, drifting through a kaleidoscope of them.. I was certainly on a journey of some importance.
Haven’t visited this topic in years.
@@72marshflower15 thank you for sharing that and also thank you for not thinking I was being sarcastic or doubtful because often online people misconstrue things and my days have arguing over nothing are long gone especially online with strangers LOL but that is pretty amazing and no I don't have the same memories or visions or whatever but I do believe some of my dreams or instances whether a dream or reality but feel like deja vu or of lived that moment before May indeed be some type of memory or premonition but appreciate you sharing and explaining to me so I could understand where you're coming from have a blessed day
I'm always amazed with what intellectuals come up with.
That comment is very cringe
@@garouthetiktokinfluencerhu9731 Says a man called "Garou The Tik Tok Influencer Hunter".
@@pablobronstein1247 thanks babe
@@garouthetiktokinfluencerhu9731 :*
This is the literal definition of “jumping to conclusions”
the literal one? wow, that's an oddly specific dictionary you've got
@@Mimickolas figuratively speaking ofc ;)
I find the question "Am I real?" nonsensical. A better question would be: is my nature what I think it is?
This changed someone, just wanted to be sure you knew that.
I find all questions nonsensical
@@RedTurtle04 do you like among us?
Can they not be the means to the same end
Thank you, now i cant sleep
Your arguments support the theory that the Universe is a Hologram and we live in it. It's an idea that begins to have more supporters in the science community. Well done!
Nassim Haramein (I think is his name) has a very convincing argument for the holographic principle ( the argument that every bit of data in the universe can be found in whole in every particle) it is very convincing
@@bryanwiles3383 Huh.. I thought of that before anyone mentioned it.
Neat.
✨
I don't even see how this is weird. It just feels intuitive to me. If you think about how you never actually are ever able to touch the physical parts of two atoms against eachother, and you are just touching their areas of force against eachother, than matter being just a reflection of how space is curved makes just as much sense as the opposite.
Let me rephrase it in a way that might be easier to understand.
When you touch two things against eachother, you aren't actually touching the atoms against eachother. The atoms are simply being repulsed from eachother like two repulsing magnets.
If you understand this, then matter being the result of spacetime curving isn't actually that strange of a thought. It just seems weird from a human perspective on how the world works, but "touching" is actually just as weird.
Almost like that the nucleus might as well not even physically exist, as it never "touches" another nucleus, and that it could almost double as just a conceptual point in space.
But then you have things like quarks.
And when it comes to that experiment of observing quantum particles, that they cant be observed without altering them, it almost makes you wonder if these smaller particles don't even exist until you go looking for them.
Uncle no pockets.
I just reread what I wrote and the first part doesn't really make sense.
It isn't intuitive at all. What I meant was, it's just as intuitive as the concept of "touching" actually is.
@@altrivotzck6565 Hey you're fine, just a fun thought experiment anyway. It reminded me of the example of an atom that was the size of the stadium, would make the nucleus the size of a football.
This didn't cause me to have an existential crisis because I can't wrap little brain around what you were talking about. Nevertheless, I love this stuff. Good video.
It's very simple. You think you are a hand when in fact you are a shadow of the hand and it's the shadow that is the real thing not your hand.
@@majk2006 What?
@@worldwaide What what?
@@majk2006
Are you stating that the shadow I see on the ground on sunny day is the "real me?"
This thread is creating me.
The idea that the footprint creates the foot and not viceversa reminds me of Plato's myth of the cave, adding more complexity to the plot!
Fascinating.
Thanks for the detailed yet easy to follow narration.
I've had this idea for some time now that matter is just curved or "condensed" space.
Matter doesn't bend space, bent space is matter.
I've had an idea that time is a condensed form of space, just like matter is for energy, and that's why the universe expands as time passes. This is also an interesting idea. Now, there is no matter or energy, just different types of space.
Only if you forget about the important time aspect to spacetime, yeah. But gravity is actually curved space*time*, not curved space. Meaning mass and energy slows down time, and that IS gravity. This is the curvature analogy we speak about: time itself being slower down, which has an end result of a curve in space and time.There are very good videos explaining this, and I do recommend them!
Sounds like this aligns perfectly with the double split experiment, and the implications of it.
All other explanations have insinuated Hawking radiation is at the even horizon only, which made sense. Today's explanation is exciting, scarier and more interesting. Thank you.
2 things never made sense to me about that explanation. 1) why does it increase as the black hole gets smaller (less surface area should mean fewer virtual particles) and 2) shouldn't regular matter particles fall in at equal rates and offset the antimatter particles? This explanation definitely more interesting and makes more sense to me.
Many years ago I was in a lorry on the Woolwich ferry, London, waiting for the gate to open to let us off, and I was first in line - it was very peculiar, the gate slid up, and it took up most of your peripheral vision, because the windscreen was close to it and it literally felt like I , and the truck was sinking - due to that relativistic effect. Thank you for another brilliant video, Alex.
Only from my years of watching British crime shows do I know that your lorry is a delivery truck of some type and your windscreen is your windshield. 😊 Btw, cool story. Cheers.
Wars cool
Do other people similarly come to these conclusions on their own? I definitely feel like this explanation feels natural, it feels like what I expected we would learn. Is that just because I've consumed enough current content, and that's where things are pointing? When we're talking about this stuff, discussing it, it reminds me of what Einstein said about being in the right place at the right time, as discoveries were being made. Very modest, but I do get it to some extent. You can't discover Y, without first discovering A-X.
plato was right, he figured this out before proper science was invented
Well don't worry about this video, because it fails logically.
1. He says that everything causes curves and bends in space time like an object on a plane of fabric. That is only used as an example to give an idea of how it could work. Therefore it should not be used as the basis for claims at it hasn't been proven and therefore is unscientific.
2. He talks about particles "popping into existence". That's impossible according to one of Newton's laws.
3. Gravity can not create mass. We all knows black holes pull in light and gravity affect light right? Our mass creates gravity. Gravity pulls in the light around our hand. Let's say there is a torch shining. The hand bends the light a bit, causing less light to hit the wall behind your hand. Our hand creates the shadow by stopping the light, our hands mass creates the gravity that causes the shadow. Therefore mass creates gravity
@mr man you forget about the double slit experiment my man. “Particles popping into existence” also, the theory of black holes and worm holes.
Yeah, it's just collective knowledge, and it's being hyper accelerated by the internet. It's almost creepy how similar people are, input the same data into our brains and we'll output more or less the same stuff. People always praise "geniuses" as if they're something special, but they're not, they just happened to be one of the first to think about something and also tell other people about it or do something with that idea. But if Einstein hadn't done it someone else would have shortly after, if Bill Gates hadn't done it someone else would have shortly after. They're not special, everything would have been just the same without them because the collective knowledge required to get to that point had been accumulated and was available as input. That's basically what society is, a super computer using humans as CPU's, and the input data is called culture, then the bad ideas are pruned and the good ones continue for further computation and testing. Some people act like mp3 players would have never existed without Steve Jobs, they obviously would have, there is no possible way for all the technology we currently have to exist and nobody thinking of making a digital walkman. In this alternate future where Steve Jobs didn't exist nobody would have ever thought of playing an audio file on a phone, it's ridiculous. Obviously people would have thought of that without him, he contributed nothing. It's very obvious with an example like Steve Jobs, but the same is true for everyone else, even for people dealing with more obscure knowledge like Einstein did. Nobody is special and everyone is expendable because at the end of the day we're all trained apes and many more apes are being trained by the same environment to output the same things.
I could get behind this if it werent for 'free' thought. The mere ability to question our existence tells me that we are not the shadow. If I want to move my toe, I can. If there were an overwhelming feeling of lack of control, or if perhaps we were not even aware of the concept of control, then maybe this would be worth thinking about.
Only the choice to move your toe can be detected before you consciously make that choice, just because you feel like you are in control doesn't necessarily mean you are
Depends on your opinions of determinism.
cope
Lol imagine using libets heavily criticized experiment
I always heard that "reality is for people who can't handle drugs..." - I think I'd prefer drugs sometimes.
That ride was called The Gravitron at my local Fair.... So much fun. Can remember at a certain point you can go upside down
Astrum after giving everyone existential crisis "of course this is all just a Theory", like that's gonna help now lol
This is NOT an existential Crisis. Time Field Theory on the other hand is. Because time is the 4th dimension, properties of time exist in all 4 dimensions. Time (the sequences of events) takes on different behaviors between dimension ally bound systems and effects the behavior of what we measure.
-In quantum mechanics we can only either know a particles position or velocity, never both, we can only determine where a particle ends up based on a probability wave, and particles themselves appear as waves until measured. (the reason being everything in quantum mechanics is either a point, or wave that we can only me measured through a 2 D interface (a screen or polarized field).
- Quantum Particles themselves have a property called entanglement where a change to one entangled particle does the opposite for the other instantaneously regardless of distance, (faster than light) Quantum entanglement, as evidenced by the double slit quantum eraser, allows future events entangled particle to alter what we measured in the past
-1n empty space virtual particles pop in and out of existence purely chaotically. There is no way to measure time and there is no arrow of time.
Your notion of 3 spatial dimensions and 1 are of time dimension, cause and effect, begin to break down at different dimensional scalar levels. In fact, according to General relativity all time is relative, meaning the rate of change to time VARIES
The existential crisis here is that you are not just possibly a shadow of curved space, but also time, and either some form, or all forms of it: Chaos, Probability, Causality, and Relativity. 4 properties of time and 4 corresponding spacetime dimensions and fundamental laws of physics that only work at certain scales that are conceptually and mathematically contradictory that no scientist in over 100 years has been able to solve.
and for all you sacred geometry types it actually takes 4 shadows of a sphere to add up to its surface area.
it begs the question, how can anything even be real? Maybe the number 4?
@@hazbinhotel8436 don't get it
There is the famous statement. "I think, therefore, I am." The very fact that this video exist and more impotyantly, that these ideas exist and we can ponder their meaning is proof that we exist. Further, the footprint in the sand would not have existed had someone not made it. if no one walked there or if a series of objects landed and were picked up by some force then there would be no footprint. this is kind of a "chicken or egg" argument. I believe that we were created by a deity and that we have spirits and that while the nature of our physical reality is confusing and really cannot be completely knowable, that does not negate our existence, only our understanding is flawed and we do not understand true reality as it exist.
Thank you Keith - something to think about while I ponder my Dentist appointment today.
By the way - third line - you've spelt - importantly - incorrectly.
Don't worry though - it hasn't created an existential crisis
@@ewaf88 LOL. Yes, my typing skills are astounding. LOL. I typically proofread my post, but, perfection eludes me yet again. :)
@@keithfreeman2139 You're forgiven :)
@@ewaf88 Gracias.
yes, I think therefore I am is an idea by Rene Descartes, a 17th century philosopher. it's an argument that even though it's impossible to truly know/prove anything by way of infinite regression, one can think, therefore one exists. if this video or concept interests you, I highly reading about his famous "evil demon" argument. a more current version is known as "brain in a vat."
This theory is similar to that of Plato’s idealism, a conceptual view of reality that we, and everything we view around ourselves are false incomplete copies of a real thing.
Your channel is so outstanding! Thank you for opening these wonders to all of us who haven't received training in physics or mathematics. It is truly appreciated!
Want more Science in your life? If so: I warmly recommend Sci Man Dan, Sci Show and Hbomberguy.
If a black hole is losing mass through hawking radiation, explain to me how that leads to the assumption that it's losing curvature in spacetime rather than literal mass??? Am I missing something here???
Hawking radiation is being produced from the space around the black hole, not the black hole itself. Therfore causing a reduction in space curvature, which causes a reduction in mass.
The virtual pair that pop into existence come from the space around the black hole. One is able to escape, the other is kept within the area of space around the black hole. Which causes the reduction of curvature and in turn, mass. So, the only effect the black hole has on this process is its mass creating the curvature that retains one of the virtual pair. Space curvature is what is being directly effected, not the mass of the black hole. Which, because they are linked, reduces the mass as well.
He is saying that the black hole is losing literal mass, but just not through the way that it's usually described. Hope that helps.
@NG Got it, thanks for the follow-up :)
This is still just an alternative theory, right?
1. Hawking radiation is a theoretical effect, never observed, except in "analog" systems. It can't be evidence for anything by definition. It is probably true, but that's as much as we know.
2. There is no "literal mass." Mass and energy are the same thing. In GR equations, there is only energy density encoded in the stress-energy tensor. We know that energy is conserved, so if a BH emits radiation, then it loses mass/energy. Although it's not exactly correct, the radiation originates outside the horizon _due to_ mass/energy existing somewhere under the horizon, it must still balance out. We also know that GR is correct, and its equations _relate_ energy content with the curvature of spacetime. _Relate_ means there is an equal sign, but no arrow pointing one way or another. Take an equation x=2y. You can solve it for x if you know y, or for y if you know x, but it doesn't say that x _causes_ y, or the other way around, or maybe they are both caused by something third which is not in the equation. Less mass = less curvature, but both statements "mass causes curvature" and "curvature causes mass" are compatible with our understanding of physics of black holes, which is incomplete: the GR solutions contain an essential singularity, as if all mass-energy of a BH were concentrated in a single point in space, of zero volume and infinite density, in its exact center-which means it's only an approximation. Outside of black holes, the theory is totally sound, "matter tells spacetime how to curve; spacetime curvature tells matter how to move." But in case of the BH the theory breaks down. So you're likely not missing anything.
3. NG's "explanation" of Hawking radiation is nonsense. Virtual particles cannot somehow become real, they are only a mathematical "crutch" to solve QFT equations. Astrum _very explicitly_ says that it's an oft-repeated wrong explanation in the video itself. I have to point out that error, because it's the central idea of the whole presentation.
@Cy "kkm" K'Nnelson Awesome and complete explanation. Thank you for putting it in laymen. My field of expertise is in Psychological / Social science research so I understand the principle of factors and accounting for as much as is reasonably possible either side of the '=' sign, so your explanation resonated with me in terms of causality and being unable to predict directionality from effectively what is the physics equivalent of a 'correlational equation/analysis'. Thanks again and my interest in this is again piqued!
Imagine a ball in a bowl.
The ball is the mass of the black hole, the bowl is the curvature of space-time.
Hawking radiation makes the bowl smaller, which in turn reduces the mass of the black hole.
Nothing technically escapes the black hole, but the space around it still gets smaller until nothing remains.
It's like the universe (with all its matter) being compressed down into "nothing".
Are we not both? We experience mass and energy just as we experience space and time. Our bodies are structures composed of all four concepts: mass, energy, space, and time. In fact, we create our own space/time curvature.
I believe we are all these things, and much more. We are the universe itself.
Man, I really hope this is true on a fundamental level. I mean, it wouldn’t have practical consequences for my life other than being amazing.
Reflection is key.
"Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge: hope's strength, resteeled. But to earn final peace at the Universe's endless refrain, we must see all in nothingness... before we start again."
🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨
--Diamond Dragons (series)
.❤
Anyone involved in explaining science like this should never say "it's only a theory". You mean "it's just an idea" or at most a hypothesis. A theory is backed by the highest level of evidence we have.
I agree, especially considering the general public's wild misunderstanding of the term (and of science in general).
Yeah. But something's just am assumption can lead to light being shed on what's assumed, leading to the realization that in fact they're on to something credible. But w/o "facts" to support, I still think guessing leads to.logic.
Theories are not truths. They are often wrong. Right now the problem with science is current theories are built on several other unproven theories as their basis. Many areas of theory are basically gobbledygook fantasy at this point. We will likely find that many decades of theory were a rabbit hole that ultimately distracted us from truth. And that's not a problem on its own, because figuring out we're wrong leads to truth. The problem comes when people treat theory as empirical truth to the point that progress can't be made because of those theories treated as truth. And in a way, holding on to those theories holds us back. What is really needed is a revolution of new thinking....something we're not going to get with the current state of theories being treated as fact. Theories must always be treated as if they are potentially wrong paths of thinking, even if they do ultimately turn out to be true. There's no harm in challenging a theory. There is harm in solidifying a theory to behave as fact.
I mean to be a projection something has to be projected. Also, step outside the solar system and look in and now we are a projection you are seeing, considering looking at anything is actually looking back in time. Even if it is so small you can't perceive it, the person your eye is seeing took time to see.
I mean I agree with relativity and that moving at constant speed and being stationary are literally the same, but could you use the CMB to find your absolute speed by calculating the redshift (in theory not necessarily in practice)?
No, you can't find your absolute speed. You can only find your speed relative to the CBM. But the CBM is a reference system as good as any other inertial reference system (say the center of the local cluster).
If you were to be able to completely zero out your velocity with the universe, the possible outcome could be that you effectively see the universe pass by you and decay in the blink of an eye. We have no idea how fast the universe is ultimately moving, but it's possible it's moving at many times the speed of light. So if you consider that time moves slower for a person travelling faster than everyone else, such as in a rocket ship, then the fabric of space itself could be much much older. Trillions of years older, but not older as in it came before, but older as in time is technically passing faster for it than us. That could also explain virtual particles. Maybe it takes billions of times longer than we realize for a virtual particle to actually pop into existence, but because time is moving slower for us because of our speed, it seems to happen all the time. These particles may also not be actually popping into existence at all, but rather, our universe is merely zipping through the fabric of space at such a speed, that we're constantly picking up free floating particles from outside of our universe, that makes them seem to pop into existence. The virtual particles may also merely be decay of space over time. Again, trillions of years passing for every year to us.
These things might not make much practical difference, but maybe humanities ultimate end goal is to find a way to truly zero out its velocity in space, and at that point, we would effectively see the universe end right before our eyes, and maybe another one come into existence, and maybe even learn the true nature of the fabric of the universe. Things we missed because we're moving too fast to meaningfully interact or understand.
@@WackyAmoebatrons Ah fair enough
@@peoplez129 Surely the "speed" of the universe is meaningless if everything is relative to small parts of itself
So, the case may be that the shadow is a 2D projection of the body, which is itself a 3D projection of the mind, which is a 4D projection of the soul, which is a 5D projection of... who knows.
Maybe…i always thought a big problem with the infinite existence would be boredom…so a way to combat that is this short “life” we have, where we don’t know what we experienced before our birth nor what comes after our death…it’s a comforting way to look at…but we can’t say for sure !!!
@@koala323ro I wouldn't be bored. There is always some thing to create. I mean, we are not alone. There are new experiences every where. ...or, death is scary. I for one, don't know what comes after death. So I just...have fun. Because life is too short, and too beautiful.
I just think there are some questions that will never be answered. I remember I was shocked beyond belief when many years ago Stephen Hawking said " In 20 years we will know EVERYTHING ". Mankind trying to fathom his own existence and the Cosmos around him is fascinating, but goodness me, I felt that was a rather arrogant if not ignorant statement from Professor Hawking. This Universe is mind boggling and beyond comprehension just in its sheer size, and to be honest when I see documentaries or look at books or photographs about it, I am in complete awe. I cannot help but be reminded of a line of scripture in the Bible that states ......"For the heavens declare the Glory of God".....Thank you for this video. We should always endeavour to learn as much as we can.
I say this may simply be over complicating things. Our perception of motion is not simply observed through visual cues. The overall perception of your position in space is called proprietion. We also have sensation for touch, as well as sensations for motions like push and tug, mainly in your inner ear. Interestingly we can put ourself in situations where our position in space is the opposite of normal, and our body's will adapt (such as when hanging upside down), yet still, you could probably be able to tell what's happening.
"Proprioception" - Proprioception, otherwise known as kinesthesia, is your body's ability to sense movement, action, and location. It's present in every muscle movement you have. Without proprioception, you wouldn't be able to move without thinking about your next step.
I love these Astrum videos. And as much as I love these ideas, I’m always troubled that there is a flawed slippage in metaphors. We are not the unreal shadow anymore than we cause black holes. The metaphors are not stable when you change the terms this way. It’s a failure of the mathematics of metaphor. Metaphors require given conditions only hold with stable conditions, just as with any other equation. You’ve changed the condition of the shadow metaphor, so it no longer serves to accurately convey what is going on.
The fact remains that if what you perceive as “you” makes a decision and suffers the consequences of that decision, “you” are real and what you perceive is real. Being in a simulation doesn’t preclude us from responsibility, consequences, happiness, anguish, or pain. Thus, I would argue, the entire debate on “are we or aren’t we” is moot. Unless being a or being in a simulation fundamentally alters how we interact with the universe in a detrimental way, it’s an intriguing thought exercise and nothing more.
when i was a kid, i inserted a piece of metal into a electrical wall socket! yeah, i survived to tell the tale. I can testify i've experience electricity. Now, where do i insert a piece of metal into to experience a space-time curvature?
Well there was a man in the Soviet Union who accidently put his head into the beam of a particle accelerator in the 80s that might get you "close"?
@@RedIce202 I also like how the man literally went home like he didn't do anything remotely dangerous or life-threatening.
I love how the title asks what this implies about "your reality" as if the guy making these videos is experiencing a completely different reality 😂
Want more Science in your life?
I warmly recommend Sci Man Dan, Sci Show and Hbomberguy.
This channel is so perfect 🖤
The principle of Galilean relativity is really interesting through the approach of 3d animation.
If you were to animate a car moving straight through a 3d space, you would animate the space around it to create the illusion that the car is moving forward. But if you look closer it stays at the same position on the screen and the perception of movement is created in the mind.
Removing any animation to the wheels and any background but place an object that seems to grow bigger as the animation progresses and you can’t tell if it’s the car moving forward or the object moving closer
Tonight I’ve learned that the only thing I can ever know for sure is that I’m really glad I took those couple of Xanax before I stumbled across this channel.
This is manageable. This is mostly manageable information. This is not an existential crisis. This is an existential challenge…
Pretty spectacular to think that everything we know and perceive could just be the side effect of complex patterns of space curvature
Notice relativity quite often. When I stop my vehicle sometimes, and other vehicles are still moving to my key or right, I get the sensation in rolling backwards or forwards and slam on my brakes only to realize I’m not moving at all.
The bit about acceleration and gravity essentially being the same. That helped me understand why time dilation occurs with gravity,
It makes me wonder. Does acceleration affect the curvature of of spacetime? An object resting or moving obviously affects the local curvature. But without increasing mass, does increasing acceleration cause the curvature to curve more than it already is?
I feel like I’m coming as close as I ever have to finally grasping what exactly spacetime is.
Yes the faster an object accelerates the more "Massive" it becomes and therefore more spacetime is curved
@@ryan1111111555555555 that's not correct. In any reference frame, an accelerating object does not curve space-time any more than a stationary object.
@@MADSK_LLZ an object gains more mass the faster it travels, that's why its impossible to travel at the speed of light as the objects mass becomes infinitely bigger the closer to light speed it gets
@@ryan1111111555555555 mass is constant, it's energy needed to accelerate the mass that tends to infinity
@@rennoc577 yeah I get your point, it doesn't make a difference if we see it as mass increasing or the resistance to motion, same thing in this thought process
It is commonly known that, if you accelerate an object, its mass will increase; however, to understand why this phenomenon occurs, we mustn’t think of the object’s mass increasing. Instead, we should think of its energy.
In physics, mass is just simply locked up energy. We call this type of mass, ‘inertial mass.’ Essentially, inertial mass is the amount of resistance that a physical object has to any change in its motion (this includes the resistance that a body has to acceleration or to directional changes).
Im confused... A black hole literally _is_ curvature in space/time. So reducing the curvature and seeing the black hole shrink seems perfectly natural.
The analogy doesnt seem to hold up; Its not like a shadow or a footprint because those are consequences of something entirely different.
I know its overly simplified, but the ol blanket with marbles on it to represent gravitational wells can be useful. You put a marble on and it forms a divot, if you push up from the bottom and flatten it out then assume the marble disappears, that would be... weird, and I think thats what this video seems to be implying this is like?
but as far as Im aware when a black hole forms, any marble that could have existed is obliterated, its just the blanket pulled down to an infinitesimally small point. Push the blanket back up and there isnt anything left. (I think this is still strange, because what exactly happened to the marble? but I think that speaks more to the information paradox than an odd footprint analogy.)
If you were a being that could only persevere the curvature of spacetime wouldn't that be the only conclusion you could make?
The footprint analogy and the information paradox are closely related.
Essentially, what the footprint analogy is stating is that erasing the footprint, erases you.
Now, if the mass is truly gone in a black hole. We have serious issues with our understandings of physics that need corrected. If what you’re saying turns out to be true. It could be possible that the mass isn’t simply just obliterated. It could quite literally be that it is exiting our fabric of reality, and entering another one. Black holes might be how new universes are formed. Our entire universe might just be the inside of a larger black hole. Mandelbrot fractals come to mind. You can zoom in nearly infinitely, and still observe immense detail. We could be within a long generation of universes born within black holes, which themselves might form black holes, and so on.
@@gravoc857
TBH, science doesn't know enough about Black holes to even make guesses about what's going on inside.
We can use particle accelerators to recombine some of the fundamental forces. If our puny power levels can do that, it's entirely possible that a Black hole puts ALL the forces back together.
No telling what might be possible.
But if the hypothesis about the one force breaking apart randomly, and if how it breaks changes all the constants and laws, then what's possible inside could be completely unthinkable to us.
I’m confused too, but my understanding is that saying that a curvature in space time causes mass is just as valid as saying that mass causes a curvature in spacetime.
@@higginsisaac It’s really wild to think that we could theoretically create matter by curving spacetime. Or more precisely, the various different quantum fields that permeates through our universe.
Maybe we aren't our shadows, but we are being followed by remnants of black holes trying to take us in, and the light is the only thing pulling us back.
The answer to the question "are we real" is "yes we are real". Everything that experiences a "reality" is real, because it's happening.
Is our universe the fundamental reality? we don't know that. We may be in a simulation. But that does not mean we are not real. We, the universe around us, and a possible super-universe around our own, is what we call reality, and we are a part of it.
I very much appreciate your effort in making these videos, I find space and specifically black holes and Hawking radiation to be mindblowingly fascinating and can't get enough of the explanations that help me wrap my head around them.
One minor, but, in my opinion, relevant criticism: As scientifically accurate as you're striving to be in this video, I wish you wouldn't then conclude by saying that this was all "just a theory". Obviously, most people know what you mean, but when in this day and age, there are people seriously arguing that gravity and evolution are "just theories" and therefore on the same level as other biased and scientifically unfounded attempts of explaining our reality, I would much prefer if you used the word "hypothesis" instead ;)
Gravity and the evolution of man are theories. Neither have been proven. What is your point?
@@ricomartinez6145 My point is that "theory" and "hypothesis" are not synonyms in scientific discourse, but they are being used synonymously in every day speech. Your answer is exactly why I brought this up.
A scientific theory has been repeatedly tested and is supported by lots of data. It is therefore not merely an educated guess, but it is substantiated by independent experimentation and evidence and is widely accepted as explanation for an occurrence by the scientific community. It is as close to a fact as you can get in science.
A hypothesis is basically a guess that hasn't been tested at all. It is what people usually mean when they say "just a theory", but in science, a hypothesis is light years away from being a theory (although every hypothesis has the potential of becoming a theory one day).
No graviton; no evidence of gravity. Look up Electric Universe
Really interesting video, but I feel the analogy could be refined a bit. Based on how I understood the video, the theory of the curvature of space influencing mass (rather than mass causing the curvature of space) wouldn’t imply that we are the “shadows” or “footprints” rather than the “foot.” It would imply that we are the foot, but our footprints and the sand that forms the footprint have influence over us, rather than us imprinting on the sand. And that’s something I think people need to understand more in general - we have less control over our lives than we think. Tough to accept but also liberating to let go of what we can’t control.
Sorry, speed as one of the functions of motion (s,v,a,m etc) seems the wrong one to recite when speaking of Galilean Relativity. Speed excludes a directional component, which must be considered, must it not?
What happens if your experiment starts listing left? The results will differ, yet your predictions will be unable to account for it.
Why?, there's no force contrasting it, no friction and unless that object would have a change in velocity, but the object isn't accelerating therefore no.
he meant velocity.
Excellent science led presentation on Plato's allegory of the cave. I am surprised that you did not use that in a video heavily laden with the philosophy of the story. Cheers 🤙
The best ride that Kennywood Park in Pittsburgh ever had was the Roder. It was exactly the same ride you shown.
The floor dropped while it spun in circles so fast that you wouldn't fall. You stuck to the wall. It was great. Wish they would bring that back.
*Awesome video!!!! Love your channel, mate! space stuff is so cool! cheers* 💪👍🚀🌑🔭🌜