When I first subscribed to you I thought why am I bothering with any of this. My dear, you're awesome I love you in an intellectual way. My mind is always jumping every time your videos appear. Thank you for the great information. 🤗
The Big Ring and Giant Arc are not only near each and the same distance from earth (9-10blyrs), but also seem to be concentric to each other. The concentric configuration would seem to suggest that they may have the same point of origin or be part of a larger pattern?
This came to my mind, too. The way how the Giant Arc envelops the Big Ring seems too obvious. I wonder, what lingers within the center of the Big Ring. Maybe the place, where everything started and origins from?
I love Sabine's humor as well as the explanations. At times more information than I may completely understand, she does break it down to assist people like myself. Thank you for this channel
Disappointing that she's bought into the media story about Elon Musk. You'd think that she'd know that media stories are made up by idiots. And yes, everyone of you who think Elon Musk is an idiot just shows your own unhinged ignorance. Hate and rage is not a substitute for nuanced thinking.
Like all beings of the passive sex, Sabine is far too credululous, credulity being a function of passivity and not restricted to the passive sex; plenty of men are as passively credulous as imbecile children.
So appreciative to have you're expertise and thoughts on these awesome topics Sabine! Shared the IBS video with wife and thinks it might be her problem too so thanks for the awareness.
The really cool thing is they were discovered by a student. "The Big Ring was identified by Alexia Lopez, a PhD student at the University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), who also discovered the Giant Arc - a structure spanning 3.3bn light-years of space. Asked how it felt to have made the discoveries, she said: "It's really surreal. I do have to pinch myself, because I made these discoveries accidentally, they were serendipitous discoveries. But it is a big thing and I can't believe that I'm talking about it, I don't believe that it's me."
I read in another article about this discovery that the Big Ring is actually a helical structure that we are viewing end-on. I guess its length was taken into account when calculating the probability of it existing.
@@birtybonkers8918 Astrophysics has developed methods meanwhile to get more information about three-dimensional structures in spacetime. So I assume, it's more than a conjecture.
Its the Admonition from Star Trek: Picard. A seemingly unnatural circle of stars purposely placed in an unnatural pattern to draw attention. They discovered the "Hand of God" nebula from Babylon 5 in 2014.
Sabine, I really appreciate what you do. I saw news on this pop into my feeds, but just assumed it was hype like other saying this and that proves a crisis. Thank you for filtering all the news for us, because I really don't know what is or isn't real or just hype. All this to say, I really trust your thoughts and opinions.
"Thank you for filtering all the news for us," Gentle Ben's Predigested Factoids! "I really trust your thoughts and opinions." Someone's got to do the thinking.
1379 as a code and 1376 comments ... hmm a nice meaningful coincidence (from a mystic POV) Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky, Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone, Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die, One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie. To corroborate the mystic claim cut and paste into your browser "AAA Day in the LIfE of the 137 SS Mystic - September 13, 2013 - Ancient Chinese Secret - Yang Hui and 1379"
I also have found a big ring recently, it is around my hips, and it also destroys my theory that I am not too fat. The ring has grown during the last months, when I significantly reduced my daily exercise, and ate more sugared food. I had another theory, that said it wouldn't matter, but I also had to find it wrong. So that's it for today with theories of massive clusters and unexpected accumulations of matter.
I love when our current knowledge hits bang up against new data, because that's where new science grows. 😊 Thank you, Sabine, for sharing this with us. ❤❤
One of the problems is with the continual use of the word "should" where the proper phrase is "unlikely". Another problem is if the universe is infinite, and it may be, then a 5.2sigma anomaly isn't really so significant.
@@freshbakedclips4659 there are astrophysicist that believe in God, they just listen to facts and not to a book that says that the Universe was created in 6 days. Gods were created to explain things we didn't understand, like the God of Thunder, but the more we learned, the more we discovered and the more we realized that there is an explanation behind these things, and there isn't a big man that lives in the sky at work, and then we stopped believing in gods like Zeus and Athena because it's stupid now, right? We'll say the same thing about the current Gods many years in the future, and then we'll have new Gods and so on. Also, why are you on a scientific channel if you're just going to talk about how all of these are done by God so we shouldn't look further into it? You're just going to make your whole algorithm about cosmological dilemmas for Atheists that don't believe in God
The cosmological principle sounds like another example of physicists somehow thinking that what they find elegant or psychologically satisfying is relevant to science. Violation of the null hypothesis is not meant to be an identity crisis.
@@sethflores1680 Sure... Because they finally saw the light and moved on! The Greeks did it with their mythologies... The Scandinavians too... Along with MANY others... And even though the mythologies of Olympus and Asgard say, are still rich, in an historic and literary sense, they were religions that simply stagnated over time... That same fate will eventually befall the currently remaining religions too... As they stagnate as we continue to learn more and more about how Our Universe works! Sure... Some might get a little political bounce here and there, particularly in this bizarre trans climate... But the trend is clear: Stagnation!
I already talked about the expanding universe. I would like to give you an example. You are in a parking lot outside a busy shopping mall, watching an old lady backing her car for two minutes. She is 75 years old. Let's calculate the ratio: 2 minutes / 75 years * 365 days * 24 hours * 60 minutes = 5e-8 The Hubble determined that the universe was expanding about 100 years ago; since then, everybody has assumed that to be true. Let's calculate the ratio again: 100 years / 13.8e9 years = 7.2e-9 The universe is considerably older than that, but we need some number to plug into an equation. You have considerably more data about the old lady than about the universe. The conclusions that you would reach would be that: 1) The old lady always drives backward on highways. 2) The universe is constantly expanding. They are both wrong. If the universe was shrinking for some time and then expanding and then shrinking and expanding, you wouldn't know that. Based on measured data, you cannot guess what happened in the past. If the universe was expanding, how would you end up with galaxies arranged in a circle? They would have to be placed in pretty random locations. The idea of a Big Bang originating from nothing and constantly expanding is just a bunch of baloney.
This is so cool! The most exciting discoveries in science always arise when empirical evidence contradicts (rather than upholds) pre-existing models :)
I love Lambda-CDM and the Cosmological Principle getting shaken up. Especially the later just feels like it's just held onto religiously because of the perceived simplicity/beauty.
Credit where it’s due, Alexia Lopez a UCLan PhD student discovered both the Giant Arc and the Big Ring - so logically she should progress to discover a Huge Sphere in our near future.
The giant arc is the mouth, the big ring is the nose, we need two smaller rings for the eyes, next. Once we locate one, we'll know where the other should be. Unless the "Cosmological Principal" is winking, of course.
I'd always wondered what that part of the song from that part of the movie meant. (Lennon wrote, "I am the walrus," because he was outraged that college professors were analyzing his lyrics. Was YS after that?)
@@stcredzero In this song he just read titles in the newspaper. Probably college professors had analysed "Lucy in the Sky" or "Tomorrow never knows" or "Strawberry fields".
The scale of the recent discoveries of our universe due to new technologies and advanced instruments like the JWST is impressive. When I hear or see these incredible discoveries about the size and complexity of our universe, I feel like an atom on my toenail staring perplexedly at the atom that sits on the tip of a hair on my head thinking... "so distant and mysterious... How is it possible and what secrets does it hide?!" The reality is that we are even smaller than the atoms of our body when we look at the universe. Just like them, we still have no idea of our real dimension. Humanity will probably never live long enough to know...
1:13 - To my eyes that clearly looks like something you’d expect to find in a random uniformly distributed pattern if you look at enough samples. Aka it won’t tell us anything new or interesting about astrophysics.
@@HarryNicNicholas The trouble with bubble universe theory is that if the laws of the universe end up being just the laws of our universe, and a merging bubble has different values, then we'd end up with a bigger bubble of averaged values. And I don't want to have my molecules averaged.
Considering the fact that light travels at approximately 186,000 mi/sec., distances like 2 Billion light years are just to mindboggling to comprehend! At least for my feeble mind! 🤔🤔💥💥
There are more plank lengths across one grain of sand then grains of sand if placed side by side in contact across the observable universe. I thought your "feeble" mind might like that one as well😊 By the way the fact that you are curious about these topics, whether or not you fully understand, indicates that your mind is at all "feeble"👍
Just like the big dipper, it exists in our brains, apparently as our culture trained us. What are the odds of seeing any shape you want out of perhaps an infinite number of infinite things?
Sabine, look at the color coded big ring and giant arc. What we are looking at is we happen to be at the right vantage point to see concentric and slowly counter-rotating Birkeland currents. See Arp's and Birkeland's work. The reason why astrophysicists are baffled is because they refuse to consider that space is just a rarefied plasma and electrical phenomena act at every scale.
@@geosynchronous4386 I'm not God. He staffs out a lot of the work these days. And no, I can't pass on your questions to on high. Get praying for answers.
Couldn't these megastructures simply be a statistical artifact? If you have a big enough universe with random distribution and you search for basically anything that has any pattern , you're bound to find something, since there are potenntially infinite number of patterns in the matter distribution
She says the odds are like 1 in 3 billion, but I think her math is off. Maybe that's explains the difference between the density of her brain and Elon Musks. He seems to be better at calculating odds and turning it into cash.
'That should not exist'....funny how often I see this in astronomy videos. That just means eggheads are far too attached to their narrow view and half-baked view of reality.
I’ve heard these structures might be linked to baryon acoustic oscillations during the first microseconds after inflation began and those are essentially where peaks of the sound waves froze as the universe expanded beyond the point of being able to transmit sound so galaxies started forming in those regions first as more matter was closer together for gravitational collapse. And that was months ago.
your comment is very eloquent and clever but mine is cleverer. Just kidding. Man the internet. What are we doing here? I like it. It sounds reasonable tho. But how can it sound, when there was no sound? I wonder... And who creates reality, if all models are imagination in the first place until we prove them and they become, reality... Do they become reality? Imagination? Really?
@@lionspirit360 If the “big bang” theory holds true, whether or not our current calculations based on observations and simulation results hold true (cue first four seconds of the theme song to the comedy series of the same name as the theory), then would it not stand to reason that there was likely a period during expansion where everything was close enough to go through multiple phase changes rapidly as it was cooling and those fluctuations caused matter which was probably close enough together to transmit sound even for a microsecond, 13.8 Billion years or more later, those random fluctuations of kinetic energy rippling through a baby universe going through rapid phase changes might have left a few 3 dimensional imprints on the universe it formed? Also time may have worked a little differently back then than it does now (cue music) theoretical conditions.
@@michaelstiller2282 I mean we might be seeing one for the first time, we had to find evidence of our hypothetical predictions of exoplanets, then when we were certain we had we started finding them everywhere. This is but one hypothetical prediction of the Big Bang Theory that’s supported by most of our current understanding and we’ve been looking for evidence. This might be just the tip of the iceberg. More science will have to be done to be certain.
This woman is the epitome of a genuine soul, and intelligent mind, and a passionate desire to educate others. It's like finding a very well balanced solar system with 3 suns.
And more holes poled in the current Theory. Back when I was an undergrad, I proposed the current model (as it was then) was logically flawed, but I was an undergrad so got ignored. I believe my alternate still logically fits even with these newer revelations though even though I can't prove it. So every time I see another hole poked in the current Theory that doesn't appear to also negate mine, I'm left thinking "maybe I was right; maybe all my Professors were worried about reputational-damage to even consider alternatives" Or maybe I was wrong. We'll see. [Could I have proven my alternate in the 90's - don't know. Could I prove it now having been out of the game for several decades - nigh on impossible.]
Two rings and one is bigger then the other, they're the same height in the "universe" as eachother. Think about that ... they're the same height ^ as eachother... and parallel
We already know Lambda-CDM is wrong, so it's not exactly surprising if another one of its predictions is also wrong. Also, Lambda-CDM is founded in part on an _assumption_ concerning smoothness, so how can it be depended upon to calculate anything definitive about what _degree_ of smoothness exists?
Various publications are crediting the "Big Ring" discovery to Alexia Lopez, team leader of the data analysis. She is also credited with the discovery of the "Giant Arc" in 2021. Lopez is a PhD student at the University of Central Lancashire.
Strange how many discoverys are called "shouldn't be impossible" like we have an actual manual for the universe 😊 thanks for the awesome work, would like to know who's your cutter ;)
Well i don't mind the discovery part. But it really troubles me when those who disagree with main stream science get ridiculed for presenting other ideas. Basically saying they are wrong. And then main stream saying well we got more work to do as this doesn't work with our models, and the other ideas are like. Its explained in my theory.
@@enderyu He's accidentally right though. It really shouldn't be impossible -- because it's actually there which means that it is possible and we shouldn't be saying it should be impossible. It's the assumption that's wrong, not the universe.
Science progresses by using current evidence to formulate a model that explains not just the evidence but has predictive power. Then you get future observations that suggest something is not right about the model, so you go and look at whether the model needs replacing rather than just tuning a bunch of parameters to fit any observation. Finding things that 'should not happen' is one of the joys of science, it provides scope for further understanding.
I would be surprised if strictures like this did NOT exist. I don't think it proves anything. The Universe is very big. We still don't understand just how big it is.
A quasar is a rare event in a local region, yet the universe is large enough we see them all the time. Sounds like random structure chances of 1:3mil would happen often enough if the local region was expanded.
The ‘ring’ is not quasars, but gas backlit by quasars. The spectra therefore includes distance information, so it’s not like a random arrangement looking like a shape to only us. It’s odd that the ring is perpendicular to our view, however.
Could it possibly be a sphere, and we're seeing something like a fresnel effect through the edges of it, where more of this matter overlaps?@@steveschunk5702
I'm no expert on this, but the fact that they form a ring suggests to me that they are mutually connected to some event that happened in the past. Like ripples on a pond.
I read about this earlier this week. I've always wondered why do we assume the Cosmological Principle at all? There must be a good reason for it, though it's not clear to me. Could someone help explain why the Cosmological Principle is assumed to be true?
I think, it´s what astronomers observed since decades, homogeneity and isotropy. Since it fits the very small fluctuations of the CMB, it became a paradigm. But observations become better now...
@@spaceman081447 yes. It always sounded reasonable to me. But the edges of our vision now extend a long way away and far back in time. But modifying or discarding the CP would be very deep and consequential. This debate might go on for hundreds or thousands of years. Remember, the problem with the rotation of the galaxy has been known for about 200 years. All you need is a telescope and Newton’s or Keplers laws
I dont understand what proof they have from the observations that this is a "structure". What makes them believe they are anymore connected than the stars in our constellations?
Thanks again Sabine for keeping everyone on their toes! The CMB is the biggest picture we have of the universe and it contains structures (like rings, hot and cold spots, Steven Hawking's initials etc.). Why would we not expect to see structures on a smaller (1 billion light year) scale?
Because they are not predicted to exist with the currently popular cosmology. Those differences in the CMB are small, variations of about 1/10,000. Also, some argue that even that level of inhomogeneity does not fit current BB theory.
Hypothesis 1: At what relational distances would gravitational lensing produce the least distortion? Hypothesis 2: An older than anticipated universe may have held evaporating black holes, seeding this ring. Hypothesis 3: Bangs induce temporal illusions where the four forces produce some surprising instances, as if rings in a pond.
Can none of you understand whate Sabbine has said? It is not complicated. Our current models of physics and cosmology do not allow for these discoveries, so, in light of that, we need to rethink our understanding of physics. She is not saying as an all knowing dictator “this should not exist” She is saying “this is something new that we never theorized or accounted for” You people frustrate the hell out of me.
You know, I am really tired of hear what most Astroscientists have to say about our universe. If these people would reject two opinions about the universe we would be able to leap forward with new knowledge. The two opinions are: 1) The Big Bang Theory and the opinion that the universe is expanding. To put it simply, the universe has always been, it has no beginning. 2) the universe is limitless in size. The universe's age is infinite and its size is infinite. The sooner science accepts that the better off we will be in understanding more about the universe. The Webb Telescope is beginning to undermine The Big Bang Theory. It is just a matter of time before that Theory is completely discredited. It will be amusing to see how long it takes some scientist to let go once that happens. I give Hossenfelder credit for suggesting that some theories need to be either re-evaluated or discarded.
I heard a story about a time when a native tribe on a relatively small island saw some odd looking waves in the ocean, so they told the old chief, he sad and stared at the waves until one day he saw an outline of a relatively massive ship fully appear. The brain will see when its ready, and observed long enough. Maybe?
“Scientists have calculated that the chances of something so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten.” ― Terry Pratchett, Mort So we are actually living on Discworld and flat-earthers were right. Damn.
When I was an undergraduate in physics in the '60s, my advisor was a physicist of no special distinction whatsoever exept that he was an experimentalist at the Wilson synchrotron at Cornell University. He liked to make noises about "We may have to revise our current theories..." Jeez...imagine that - science doing exactly what it's supposed to do: coming up with answers that raise new questions. Glad to see that that part of science is still alive and well. 😎
I've just read that study team speculated that the Big Ring could be possible evidence of the Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC), where the ring is a gravitational signal from the Big Bounce.
1:3M sounds like small odds, but what’s that in reference to? If it’s per galactic formation, how many formations are there (as in how many times are the dice being rolled)? If there are 1M known galaxies, then it’s pretty good odds it will happen.
There is a background level that is more sluggish than gravity racing away at light speed, gravity reaches background levels it joins the crowd. This sluggish background builds up around clusters, it meets the equally sluggish intergalactic background and there is resistance and lensing. This mixing and resistance at many levels in such a large structure exist and there is a slight statistical depression in spacetime that gathers more stuff. There may be a lot of stuff that is not visible in between clusters or strings. Saw a Wolfram talk and he appears to be making an attempt to come up with a mathematical approximation of this background and mixing.
I am not clear what makes these things qualify as “structures“? Is it not possible that this is merely us recognizing patterns, as if they were rorshock tests?
"gravitationally bound" structures are not just mere recognized patterns.. those things are internally linked via gravity. That they are linked is probably measured over time.. the impressive part is that they can detect this, but I'm sure enough astronomers will (do?) look over this and check it for plausibility.
There are many things that astronomers, cosmologists have been ignoring because they don’t fit the models. Some of those models were probably to quick to adopt. My favorite was how with better pictures we would see far out galaxies at an abnormally large angular size due to expansion of space.. no such thing and you can hear crickets
There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio than are dreamt of in your Cosmological Principle. By the way, there was another paper about MOND recently, showing more support for it, and rejecting the the 16 sigma paper rejecting MOND about a month ago. I hope you'll cover it!
😊🙏 So much wondrous things we can't even know how to comprehend that exist in our human plane ... Imagine just how differently energies behaved in other realms?! Thank You So Much Sabine for the illumination! 🕯🌎
If you zoom out you’ll see another ring to the left of that one and if you zoom out further you’ll see it’s a woman holding the ladle over a stove. God loves to play cosmic jokes.
Sorry for the misspelling that I didn't spot soon enough (new videographer). I swear I know it's spelled "Principle"! 😅
😂😂😂💯💯💯
I hope you'll be a mild principal to them 😅
It would be funnier to just pretend you spelled it correctly and everyone complaining is just an [insert whatever here]
When I first subscribed to you I thought why am I bothering with any of this. My dear, you're awesome I love you in an intellectual way. My mind is always jumping every time your videos appear. Thank you for the great information. 🤗
The circle is one missing wheel of the "Big vehicle without wheels but with a pushbar"
The Big Ring and Giant Arc are not only near each and the same distance from earth (9-10blyrs), but also seem to be concentric to each other. The concentric configuration would seem to suggest that they may have the same point of origin or be part of a larger pattern?
This came to my mind, too. The way how the Giant Arc envelops the Big Ring seems too obvious. I wonder, what lingers within the center of the Big Ring. Maybe the place, where everything started and origins from?
I love Sabine's humor as well as the explanations. At times more information than I may completely understand, she does break it down to assist people like myself. Thank you for this channel
Are you including a humor handicap for Germans?
@@dj_laundry_list
The humour handicap is French not German.
😁
Disappointing that she's bought into the media story about Elon Musk. You'd think that she'd know that media stories are made up by idiots. And yes, everyone of you who think Elon Musk is an idiot just shows your own unhinged ignorance. Hate and rage is not a substitute for nuanced thinking.
Like all beings of the passive sex, Sabine is far too credululous, credulity being a function of passivity and not restricted to the passive sex; plenty of men are as passively credulous as imbecile children.
I didn't get the Elon Musk joke though.
Was she saying he is dumb or she is?
I get self-deprecation, but it only works if it is clear.
thanks for being one of the only people covering current research not only ahead of the game, but also reliably.
So appreciative to have you're expertise and thoughts on these awesome topics Sabine! Shared the IBS video with wife and thinks it might be her problem too so thanks for the awareness.
Your not you’re. Spell checker check time!
The really cool thing is they were discovered by a student. "The Big Ring was identified by Alexia Lopez, a PhD student at the University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), who also discovered the Giant Arc - a structure spanning 3.3bn light-years of space.
Asked how it felt to have made the discoveries, she said: "It's really surreal. I do have to pinch myself, because I made these discoveries accidentally, they were serendipitous discoveries. But it is a big thing and I can't believe that I'm talking about it, I don't believe that it's me."
I was hoping Albert would interrupt her with a call to give her a piece of his mind...but, alas...!
His principal wanted a word with him regarding certain "experiments" he was doing with his school's elevators...
@@larispostae42 omg .. effing brilliant...
I read in another article about this discovery that the Big Ring is actually a helical structure that we are viewing end-on. I guess its length was taken into account when calculating the probability of it existing.
Right, good to have someone trustworthy to rely on
That would make a lot of sense although it sound like conjecture.
@@birtybonkers8918 Astrophysics has developed methods meanwhile to get more information about three-dimensional structures in spacetime. So I assume, it's more than a conjecture.
Problems for our understanding are a good thing.
Its the Admonition from Star Trek: Picard. A seemingly unnatural circle of stars purposely placed in an unnatural pattern to draw attention. They discovered the "Hand of God" nebula from Babylon 5 in 2014.
Its "The Admonition" from Star Trek Picard
Agreed the thing is that a big part of learning something new is admitting when a person is wrong and not keep on saying the opposite of the truth.
Sabine, I really appreciate what you do. I saw news on this pop into my feeds, but just assumed it was hype like other saying this and that proves a crisis. Thank you for filtering all the news for us, because I really don't know what is or isn't real or just hype. All this to say, I really trust your thoughts and opinions.
"Thank you for filtering all the news for us,"
Gentle Ben's Predigested Factoids!
"I really trust your thoughts and opinions."
Someone's got to do the thinking.
One RING to rule them all, One RING to find them, One RING to bring them all and in the DARKNESS bind them.
ash nazg durbatuluk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatuluk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
Nice haiku
Fly you fools!
Its the Admonition from Star Trek: Picard. The "Hand of God" nebula from Babylon 5 was discovered IRL several years ago, now the Admonition
1379 as a code and 1376 comments ... hmm a nice meaningful coincidence (from a mystic POV)
Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
To corroborate the mystic claim cut and paste into your browser "AAA Day in the LIfE of the 137 SS Mystic - September 13, 2013 - Ancient Chinese Secret - Yang Hui and 1379"
I also have found a big ring recently, it is around my hips, and it also destroys my theory that I am not too fat.
The ring has grown during the last months, when I significantly reduced my daily exercise, and ate more sugared food. I had another theory, that said it wouldn't matter, but I also had to find it wrong.
So that's it for today with theories of massive clusters and unexpected accumulations of matter.
I love when our current knowledge hits bang up against new data, because that's where new science grows. 😊 Thank you, Sabine, for sharing this with us. ❤❤
One of the problems is with the continual use of the word "should" where the proper phrase is "unlikely". Another problem is if the universe is infinite, and it may be, then a 5.2sigma anomaly isn't really so significant.
Another cosmological dilemma for Atheist who don't believe that God exist
@@freshbakedclips4659how boring
@@freshbakedclips4659 there are astrophysicist that believe in God, they just listen to facts and not to a book that says that the Universe was created in 6 days. Gods were created to explain things we didn't understand, like the God of Thunder, but the more we learned, the more we discovered and the more we realized that there is an explanation behind these things, and there isn't a big man that lives in the sky at work, and then we stopped believing in gods like Zeus and Athena because it's stupid now, right? We'll say the same thing about the current Gods many years in the future, and then we'll have new Gods and so on. Also, why are you on a scientific channel if you're just going to talk about how all of these are done by God so we shouldn't look further into it? You're just going to make your whole algorithm about cosmological dilemmas for Atheists that don't believe in God
@@freshbakedclips4659
That is a nonsensical comment, for sure.
It's exciting when the accepted ideas of any area of investigation are called into question. Thx Doctor
Only when a person is willing to admit when they are wrong!!!
The cosmological principle sounds like another example of physicists somehow thinking that what they find elegant or psychologically satisfying is relevant to science. Violation of the null hypothesis is not meant to be an identity crisis.
That may be partly true but I think it's more that it dramatically simplifies the equations.
@@SabineHossenfelder I see what you're saying, thank you for the considered response.
Long May We Continue To Get Bewildered!!!... Everytime we discover something new! Otherwise, Science would stagnate just like Religion! 😊
@@sdwoneif religion stagnates then it's a reflection on the adherents, not religion per se.
@@sethflores1680 Sure... Because they finally saw the light and moved on! The Greeks did it with their mythologies... The Scandinavians too... Along with MANY others...
And even though the mythologies of Olympus and Asgard say, are still rich, in an historic and literary sense, they were religions that simply stagnated over time...
That same fate will eventually befall the currently remaining religions too... As they stagnate as we continue to learn more and more about how Our Universe works!
Sure... Some might get a little political bounce here and there, particularly in this bizarre trans climate... But the trend is clear:
Stagnation!
I already talked about the expanding universe.
I would like to give you an example.
You are in a parking lot outside a busy shopping mall, watching an old lady backing her car for two minutes. She is 75 years old. Let's calculate the ratio:
2 minutes / 75 years * 365 days * 24 hours * 60 minutes = 5e-8
The Hubble determined that the universe was expanding about 100 years ago; since then, everybody has assumed that to be true. Let's calculate the ratio again:
100 years / 13.8e9 years = 7.2e-9
The universe is considerably older than that, but we need some number to plug into an equation.
You have considerably more data about the old lady than about the universe. The conclusions that you would reach would be that:
1) The old lady always drives backward on highways.
2) The universe is constantly expanding.
They are both wrong. If the universe was shrinking for some time and then expanding and then shrinking and expanding, you wouldn't know that.
Based on measured data, you cannot guess what happened in the past.
If the universe was expanding, how would you end up with galaxies arranged in a circle? They would have to be placed in pretty random locations.
The idea of a Big Bang originating from nothing and constantly expanding is just a bunch of baloney.
The presentation by the researcher at the AAS is available on TH-cam and explicitly mentions Penrose’s theory.
This is so cool! The most exciting discoveries in science always arise when empirical evidence contradicts (rather than upholds) pre-existing models :)
I love Lambda-CDM and the Cosmological Principle getting shaken up. Especially the later just feels like it's just held onto religiously because of the perceived simplicity/beauty.
I *just love* the simple naming conventions used by astronomers, it makes it very accessible to the layperson.
For their défense, they have quite a good amount of things to name
They're learning from the Physicists
🤣
Yes. Like the Clowes Campusano Group
Credit where it’s due, Alexia Lopez a UCLan PhD student discovered both the Giant Arc and the Big Ring - so logically she should progress to discover a Huge Sphere in our near future.
The giant arc is the mouth, the big ring is the nose, we need two smaller rings for the eyes, next. Once we locate one, we'll know where the other should be. Unless the "Cosmological Principal" is winking, of course.
And if she found a second one maybe they they will name them after her.
@@colorado841
Lopez sounds loopy to me.. just sayin'
@@joansparky4439 I was thinking something along the lines of Alexia's spheres.
Maybe it’s a gigantic “cup-and-ball” game and Alexia should concentrate on looking for the string.
I bet those galaxies think that astrophysicist shouldn't exist. 😊
1:30 Dr Pepper (from the University of Central Lankashire) found " 4,000 thousand holes in Blackburn Lankashire" in 1967
Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall.
@@MuchMoreMatt😅
I'd always wondered what that part of the song from that part of the movie meant. (Lennon wrote, "I am the walrus," because he was outraged that college professors were analyzing his lyrics. Was YS after that?)
@@stcredzero In this song he just read titles in the newspaper. Probably college professors had analysed "Lucy in the Sky" or "Tomorrow never knows" or "Strawberry fields".
And I thought Dr Pepper was from Waco Texas
Love those little updates we have so often. Keep it up!!
The scale of the recent discoveries of our universe due to new technologies and advanced instruments like the JWST is impressive. When I hear or see these incredible discoveries about the size and complexity of our universe, I feel like an atom on my toenail staring perplexedly at the atom that sits on the tip of a hair on my head thinking... "so distant and mysterious... How is it possible and what secrets does it hide?!" The reality is that we are even smaller than the atoms of our body when we look at the universe. Just like them, we still have no idea of our real dimension. Humanity will probably never live long enough to know...
Why not?
Always try to be pessimistic even if something looks beyond impossible.
1:13 - To my eyes that clearly looks like something you’d expect to find in a random uniformly distributed pattern if you look at enough samples. Aka it won’t tell us anything new or interesting about astrophysics.
Would be interesting to see if the big arc is actually and even larger ring around the ring
crazy theory: if our universe is a big expanding bubble, then if there are big expanding bubble universes adjacent....
@@HarryNicNicholas The trouble with bubble universe theory is that if the laws of the universe end up being just the laws of our universe, and a merging bubble has different values, then we'd end up with a bigger bubble of averaged values.
And I don't want to have my molecules averaged.
In the end it's just god painting a cyclops smilie for the lols.
an*
They don't know how the universe works. This video proves that.
As a scientific novice, I love this channel.
Now, just hold on a minute there.
ALLAH ALMIGHTY KNOWS BEST.
Thank you for bringing the latest discoveries into the spotlight.
Considering the fact that light travels at approximately 186,000 mi/sec., distances like 2 Billion light years are just to mindboggling to comprehend! At least for my feeble mind! 🤔🤔💥💥
Big numbers are just like small numbers except… uh bigger. Lol
There are more plank lengths across one grain of sand then grains of sand if placed side by side in contact across the observable universe.
I thought your "feeble" mind might like that one as well😊
By the way the fact that you are curious about these topics, whether or not you fully understand, indicates that your mind is at all "feeble"👍
Now I can't wait to know what Dr. Becky will say about this discovery.
Just like the big dipper, it exists in our brains, apparently as our culture trained us.
What are the odds of seeing any shape you want out of perhaps an infinite number of infinite things?
Im seeing the God of a one- eyed smily face😅
Yes, I was thinking something similar i.e. a matter of perspective
Sabine, look at the color coded big ring and giant arc. What we are looking at is we happen to be at the right vantage point to see concentric and slowly counter-rotating Birkeland currents. See Arp's and Birkeland's work. The reason why astrophysicists are baffled is because they refuse to consider that space is just a rarefied plasma and electrical phenomena act at every scale.
Sorry about the big ring of galaxies; I set them up because I thought they would look nice over there. It was a mistake, clearly
@@geosynchronous4386 I'm not God. He staffs out a lot of the work these days. And no, I can't pass on your questions to on high. Get praying for answers.
time watching your videos is time very well spent! I thank you for doing this despite my being financially unable to support your sponsors.
Couldn't these megastructures simply be a statistical artifact? If you have a big enough universe with random distribution and you search for basically anything that has any pattern , you're bound to find something, since there are potenntially infinite number of patterns in the matter distribution
3:47 this was answered
Indeed. Even a 5 sigma anomaly is likely to occus when you have Billion of galaxies
@@AHBdV Wouldn't the 5 sigma certainty already account for the size of the observable universe?
She says the odds are like 1 in 3 billion, but I think her math is off. Maybe that's explains the difference between the density of her brain and Elon Musks. He seems to be better at calculating odds and turning it into cash.
@@whimpypatrol5503damn you stupid, couldn't even quote her right 😂
if anyone see something with their own eyes and say: this is not possible to exist - this is the definition of stupidity
What about Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall? It's like 10 billion light years in size...
'That should not exist'....funny how often I see this in astronomy videos. That just means eggheads are far too attached to their narrow view and half-baked view of reality.
I’ve heard these structures might be linked to baryon acoustic oscillations during the first microseconds after inflation began and those are essentially where peaks of the sound waves froze as the universe expanded beyond the point of being able to transmit sound so galaxies started forming in those regions first as more matter was closer together for gravitational collapse. And that was months ago.
your comment is very eloquent and clever but mine is cleverer. Just kidding. Man the internet. What are we doing here? I like it. It sounds reasonable tho. But how can it sound, when there was no sound? I wonder... And who creates reality, if all models are imagination in the first place until we prove them and they become, reality... Do they become reality? Imagination? Really?
Well if your theory is correct there would be many more. Like all of it.
@@lionspirit360 If the “big bang” theory holds true, whether or not our current calculations based on observations and simulation results hold true (cue first four seconds of the theme song to the comedy series of the same name as the theory), then would it not stand to reason that there was likely a period during expansion where everything was close enough to go through multiple phase changes rapidly as it was cooling and those fluctuations caused matter which was probably close enough together to transmit sound even for a microsecond, 13.8 Billion years or more later, those random fluctuations of kinetic energy rippling through a baby universe going through rapid phase changes might have left a few 3 dimensional imprints on the universe it formed? Also time may have worked a little differently back then than it does now (cue music) theoretical conditions.
@@michaelstiller2282 Nah. Throw one stone into water and you'll see beautiful rings. Throw hundrets and all you see are random waves.
@@michaelstiller2282 I mean we might be seeing one for the first time, we had to find evidence of our hypothetical predictions of exoplanets, then when we were certain we had we started finding them everywhere. This is but one hypothetical prediction of the Big Bang Theory that’s supported by most of our current understanding and we’ve been looking for evidence. This might be just the tip of the iceberg. More science will have to be done to be certain.
Its a sign of an ancient civilisation called the forerunners.
This woman is the epitome of a genuine soul, and intelligent mind, and a passionate desire to educate others.
It's like finding a very well balanced solar system with 3 suns.
ooh, do you think you could do me?
Is that why she had to insult Elon Musk, who's success is as far from hers as earth is from this ring of galaxies?
@@nicomeier8098 Elon > anyone on TH-cam
And more holes poled in the current Theory.
Back when I was an undergrad, I proposed the current model (as it was then) was logically flawed, but I was an undergrad so got ignored.
I believe my alternate still logically fits even with these newer revelations though even though I can't prove it. So every time I see another hole poked in the current Theory that doesn't appear to also negate mine, I'm left thinking "maybe I was right; maybe all my Professors were worried about reputational-damage to even consider alternatives" Or maybe I was wrong. We'll see.
[Could I have proven my alternate in the 90's - don't know. Could I prove it now having been out of the game for several decades - nigh on impossible.]
Time to ask for a larger collider... I'm sure it will set this problem out, don't it? 🙂
Two rings and one is bigger then the other, they're the same height in the "universe" as eachother. Think about that ... they're the same height ^ as eachother... and parallel
We already know Lambda-CDM is wrong, so it's not exactly surprising if another one of its predictions is also wrong. Also, Lambda-CDM is founded in part on an _assumption_ concerning smoothness, so how can it be depended upon to calculate anything definitive about what _degree_ of smoothness exists?
I think most physicists would disagree with that tho
@@SabineHossenfelder With the first or the second assertion, or both?
@@SabineHossenfelderI’m not mainstream and I’m glad that you are not either
Various publications are crediting the "Big Ring" discovery to Alexia Lopez, team leader of the data analysis. She is also credited with the discovery of the "Giant Arc" in 2021. Lopez is a PhD student at the University of Central Lancashire.
Strange how many discoverys are called "shouldn't be impossible" like we have an actual manual for the universe 😊 thanks for the awesome work, would like to know who's your cutter ;)
We DO have a manual, but we are the ones writing it.
Don't you mean "shouldn't be possible" or "should be impossible"?
Well i don't mind the discovery part. But it really troubles me when those who disagree with main stream science get ridiculed for presenting other ideas. Basically saying they are wrong. And then main stream saying well we got more work to do as this doesn't work with our models, and the other ideas are like. Its explained in my theory.
@@enderyu He's accidentally right though. It really shouldn't be impossible -- because it's actually there which means that it is possible and we shouldn't be saying it should be impossible. It's the assumption that's wrong, not the universe.
Science progresses by using current evidence to formulate a model that explains not just the evidence but has predictive power. Then you get future observations that suggest something is not right about the model, so you go and look at whether the model needs replacing rather than just tuning a bunch of parameters to fit any observation. Finding things that 'should not happen' is one of the joys of science, it provides scope for further understanding.
I would be surprised if strictures like this did NOT exist. I don't think it proves anything. The Universe is very big. We still don't understand just how big it is.
Sauron wants a word with Cosmologists.
Thank you for dumbing things down for us. Without sounding like you’re dumbing down. You’ve cleared a lot of ideas for me! Cheers! Thank you again
"Thank you for dumbing things down for us."
US? How many of you are in there?
@@thomasmaughan4798 at least a couple, if not more. Infinite timelines and all! Lol
alien mega structure 100 %
We're way overdue for a paradigm shift in cosmology
A quasar is a rare event in a local region, yet the universe is large enough we see them all the time. Sounds like random structure chances of 1:3mil would happen often enough if the local region was expanded.
The ‘ring’ is not quasars, but gas backlit by quasars. The spectra therefore includes distance information, so it’s not like a random arrangement looking like a shape to only us. It’s odd that the ring is perpendicular to our view, however.
Could it possibly be a sphere, and we're seeing something like a fresnel effect through the edges of it, where more of this matter overlaps?@@steveschunk5702
I'm no expert on this, but the fact that they form a ring suggests to me that they are mutually connected to some event that happened in the past. Like ripples on a pond.
I hate it when ppl say 'this shouldnt exist'..
You can only say that if you already know everything. Which we do not.
It's just an idiomatic way of saying its existence is inconsistent with some theory.
No, when I see some TV shows I can definitely say "this should not exist".
The blurring on the yoga stock footage is a wonderfully clever way of demonstrating the cosmological principle.
I read about this earlier this week. I've always wondered why do we assume the Cosmological Principle at all? There must be a good reason for it, though it's not clear to me. Could someone help explain why the Cosmological Principle is assumed to be true?
I think, it´s what astronomers observed since decades, homogeneity and isotropy. Since it fits the very small fluctuations of the CMB, it became a paradigm. But observations become better now...
@@Thomas-gk42those seem to be 2 desirable traits alright. Lol
Probably math and assumption. Possibly also a attempt to "normalize"perception of The human condition.
It is an extension of the principle that the various physical laws work the same way all over the universe.
@@spaceman081447 yes. It always sounded reasonable to me. But the edges of our vision now extend a long way away and far back in time.
But modifying or discarding the CP would be very deep and consequential.
This debate might go on for hundreds or thousands of years.
Remember, the problem with the rotation of the galaxy has been known for about 200 years. All you need is a telescope and Newton’s or Keplers laws
I dont understand what proof they have from the observations that this is a "structure". What makes them believe they are anymore connected than the stars in our constellations?
Thanks again Sabine for keeping everyone on their toes! The CMB is the biggest picture we have of the universe and it contains structures (like rings, hot and cold spots, Steven Hawking's initials etc.). Why would we not expect to see structures on a smaller (1 billion light year) scale?
Because they are not predicted to exist with the currently popular cosmology. Those differences in the CMB are small, variations of about 1/10,000. Also, some argue that even that level of inhomogeneity does not fit current BB theory.
Was wondering when this would be addressed by my favourite TH-cam channels after seeing it on the BBC one. Thanks Sabine.
I think God put things out there for us to find, just to remind us we don't actually know anything.
Love this! This is exciting!
"The Heavens declare the glory of God"
Nice joke.
@@infinity8543if you keep being in self denial it'll be to your own detriment.
@@suavehit Religious nuts are so incredibly funny it breaks me.
"You don't believe in my god so my god's gonna punish you" lmao
Lol of course it’s the same guy who’s saying “you’re so pretty” to Sabine 😂
I recently discovered you and now you are my go to science channel😊
Love your work!
Why ‘If you’re German?” The constellation has the official name Ursa Major. 🤷♀️
Hypothesis 1: At what relational distances would gravitational lensing produce the least distortion?
Hypothesis 2: An older than anticipated universe may have held evaporating black holes, seeding this ring.
Hypothesis 3: Bangs induce temporal illusions where the four forces produce some surprising instances, as if rings in a pond.
Can none of you understand whate Sabbine has said?
It is not complicated.
Our current models of physics and cosmology do not allow for these discoveries, so, in light of that, we need to rethink our understanding of physics.
She is not saying as an all knowing dictator “this should not exist”
She is saying “this is something new that we never theorized or accounted for”
You people frustrate the hell out of me.
So if the big ring did not appear by chance, what does that tell us about how it is created????
Super intelligent aliens or God
There's a lot of dots out there to make something out of.
Thank you so much for sharing your expertise with us & what’s more…you present very complex ideas in a welcoming digestible fashion.
Be well
You know, I am really tired of hear what most Astroscientists have to say about our universe. If these people would reject two opinions about the universe we would be able to leap forward with new knowledge. The two opinions are: 1) The Big Bang Theory and the opinion that the universe is expanding. To put it simply, the universe has always been, it has no beginning. 2) the universe is limitless in size. The universe's age is infinite and its size is infinite. The sooner science accepts that the better off we will be in understanding more about the universe.
The Webb Telescope is beginning to undermine The Big Bang Theory. It is just a matter of time before that Theory is completely discredited. It will be amusing to see how long it takes some scientist to let go once that happens. I give Hossenfelder credit for suggesting that some theories need to be either re-evaluated or discarded.
Sabine I gotta say your standup is really getting good keep it up.
I heard a story about a time when a native tribe on a relatively small island saw some odd looking waves in the ocean, so they told the old chief, he sad and stared at the waves until one day he saw an outline of a relatively massive ship fully appear. The brain will see when its ready, and observed long enough. Maybe?
Loving the short clips
Sabine!!!! Keep up the good work!!
“Scientists have calculated that the chances of something so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one.
But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten.”
― Terry Pratchett, Mort
So we are actually living on Discworld and flat-earthers were right. Damn.
When I was an undergraduate in physics in the '60s, my advisor was a physicist of no special distinction whatsoever exept that he was an experimentalist at the Wilson synchrotron at Cornell University. He liked to make noises about "We may have to revise our current theories..." Jeez...imagine that - science doing exactly what it's supposed to do: coming up with answers that raise new questions. Glad to see that that part of science is still alive and well. 😎
I've just read that study team speculated that the Big Ring could be possible evidence of the Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC), where the ring is a gravitational signal from the Big Bounce.
I find it fascinating how the universe sows us time and again that it doesn't care what cosmologists on earth think of it.
Gotta love how astrophysics name things.
Excellent - concise and instructive.
Sabine, I agree with you; after doing my own calculations on paper, I concluded “something doesn’t add up”.😅
I went to high school in the U.S. for a couple of years. My head master loved astronomy. He was a cosmological principal!
What is the purpose of the cosmological model? Why does it matter that it's wrong?
Is there a possibility that physics within that region of space might work differently?
It may as well be. The complexity of the universe is beyond our comprehension
I love your content and your sense of humor.
1:3M sounds like small odds, but what’s that in reference to? If it’s per galactic formation, how many formations are there (as in how many times are the dice being rolled)? If there are 1M known galaxies, then it’s pretty good odds it will happen.
Maybe the concentric Big Ring and Giant arc is the Bing Ding where our universe once bumped up against another universe?
A couple years ago some astrofycic said: " Least we know how universe work". I did replite: "You don`t know".
There is a background level that is more sluggish than gravity racing away at light speed, gravity reaches background levels it joins the crowd. This sluggish background builds up around clusters, it meets the equally sluggish intergalactic background and there is resistance and lensing. This mixing and resistance at many levels in such a large structure exist and there is a slight statistical depression in spacetime that gathers more stuff. There may be a lot of stuff that is not visible in between clusters or strings. Saw a Wolfram talk and he appears to be making an attempt to come up with a mathematical approximation of this background and mixing.
I am not clear what makes these things qualify as “structures“? Is it not possible that this is merely us recognizing patterns, as if they were rorshock tests?
"gravitationally bound" structures are not just mere recognized patterns.. those things are internally linked via gravity. That they are linked is probably measured over time.. the impressive part is that they can detect this, but I'm sure enough astronomers will (do?) look over this and check it for plausibility.
Dr. Becky did a very good discussion on this subject recently as well so astrophysicist are not ignoring it
There are many things that astronomers, cosmologists have been ignoring because they don’t fit the models. Some of those models were probably to quick to adopt.
My favorite was how with better pictures we would see far out galaxies at an abnormally large angular size due to expansion of space.. no such thing and you can hear crickets
Fantastic! thank you
There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio than are dreamt of in your Cosmological Principle.
By the way, there was another paper about MOND recently, showing more support for it, and rejecting the the 16 sigma paper rejecting MOND about a month ago. I hope you'll cover it!
The Big Ring being nearly concentric with the Giant Arc could suggest some kind of lensing effect.
😊🙏 So much wondrous things we can't even know how to comprehend that exist in our human plane ... Imagine just how differently energies behaved in other realms?! Thank You So Much Sabine for the illumination! 🕯🌎
If you zoom out you’ll see another ring to the left of that one and if you zoom out further you’ll see it’s a woman holding the ladle over a stove. God loves to play cosmic jokes.