Sometimes I lament the loss of my job due to covid, but combined with a reignited passion for physics and astronomy from this inspiring channel, I'm going back to school to pursue a different degree. Thank you Matt and all the fantastic digital artists of PBS!
Funny, but what if the universe, or even the multiverse, is (similarly) just a part of an ultra gigantic being that is growing? Dang! (bring on the theories, lol 😂)
@@JJs_playground after years of measurement and careful signal analysis, the original baryonic acoustic oscillations have been accurately recreated in the sound frequencies humans can hear. th-cam.com/video/dQw4w9WgXcQ/w-d-xo.html
"The most exciting thing for any scientist is when something they thought they knew turned out to be wrong" - this is also the most depressing thing for any student taking a test.
Points to one of the failures in education and popular media. There are hypotheses and theories on which we build understanding, not immutable facts of the universe.
I wonder 😐if the universe were to end in heat death then a universe we will never live again 😐but some how we are living as we speak you could say our lives are random but it would not make since if life was really that random i would have Ben something else but it does not seem to be the case 😐they say evolution only goes one way but what about the universe? And if earth is the only planet to have complex life it would not make since as to why our lives are not random 😐
The beginning of this video reminded my of Carl Sagan's quote about scientists - “In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
14:08 Simply put, the spacetime interval: "It's the minus of the sum of the squares of the x, y and z spacial intervals plus the square of the time interval times the speed of light." Elegance.
@@Tom-fh3zg Organically sustainably grown non-genetically modified PC vegan friendly legumes. The material of choice in these enlightened snowflake times.
Seriously, the technobabble that scientists have come up with is more than what any Star Trek writer could come up with. yes Mr Data, please continue measuring baryonic acoustic oscillations to verify the distance to my standard siren produced by merging neutron stars, to disprove the theory that the cosmic background radiation is a better measure for cosmic inflation than predictable supernovae.
We will never know if the universe is getting bigger until someone actually gets out there. Different lenses go at different speeds. When you go past different lights and temperatures your view will bend. Then you add that what you are looking at is going back in time. Lastly the universe has different densities. Not saying it can't be done and wish you good luck figuring out all these and more calculations
The explanation hit me so hard,that's why as a Stormtrooper when attached to a planet had so good aim,practice with the exact same G and when moving to different planet had bad aim at least for some time....I love physics
Dear me, I fell asleep, the Algorithm choose what I should sleep to, but I woke on somebody telling me about 'duck energy'. I had to scroll backwards, and the energy turned out to be only dark, not duck, but at the same time much stranger than a LED powered by ducks could ever be.
I've found that when a scientist has built his or her career on an idea and a new idea emerges that threatens their work, they are not excited in the least.
@@someonehiremeI agree but that would also be being human as we can all succumb to it. Psychologically criticism of their idea turns into an attack on them as a person.
Yeah I hate this line. They may be individually more open to being wrong than the average person, and science itself in principle wants to prove itself wrong, but scientists are people, the incentives in science often dont encourage proving yourself wrong, and theres a huge amoutn at stake, particularly from young researchers just establishing themselves, to be right
No...not really. Consider that the present state of science is like that of the 1860s to 1880s. Science was dogmatically adhering to theories in the evolution of organisms, the Earth, and the universe. The number of scientists vilified by the mainstream community was so vast as to create the greatest concern in the community...has science as an investigative discipline failed. We are in that period once again. The failure here is that there is such an adherence to the value of the cosmological constant that they are breaking their necks to hammer the square pegs of observational data into the round wholes of theory. There are a number of resources that describe this in sufficient detail and at an approachable level. It suffices to say that this issue is having far greater repercussions in the general scientific community because again many are seeing dogmatism when a more pragmatic approach would be to re-evaluate the underlying theory. Up until about 15 years ago thats what would have happened. Today, the egos of the "great minds of our day" rule discourse. Not very scientific.
I find it interesting that both methods using data from the big bang give different results than the other methods based on more recent events. it gives credence to the theory that dark energy changes over time.
I only recently started learning more about Physics, and there's still a lot I don't understand, but from what I have learned, all this is beginning to make at least a little more sense.
i suggest you start with small doses. I made a mistake and went on a quantum series rabbithole and it fried my brain cells. im still recuperating with lighter themes and now i can at least get asleep within half hour while before the brain was in constant thought mode and it took me two hours to calm it and fall asleep. So...baby steps :)
You know I'm no Einstein but I've spent many years learning in my spare time, with a lot of thinking when I'm not learning, and even now I have those aha moments, where I feel like I finally see some aspect of physics/qm clearly(more clearly anyways). Like someone can tell you exactly about something, but you may not have the right perspective(which can require many other understandings) to make total sense of it. You may think you do but years later it really falls into place and you realize you didn't. For me as a casual learner, it's a process, but well worth it, especially when things click and your understanding grows.
It seems that the links in the description for the Merch and Patreon are broken in the latest videos. I dont think it is just me as i checked it on several computers, thumb up so they can see it.
A month or two ago, Dr. Becky put out a video saying that there was a ballpark number put out for the gravity wave measurement. And it put it right between the two measurements. But ya, that more data is needed when Ligo goes back online.
One question I've always had that I hope some of you smart people can help me understand, or at least point me in the right direction, is: why is the expansion rate of the universe never talked about as an outer force acting on the universe? I am most likely completely wrong, but the internal model of the universe I have used for a long time is to think of it like a balloon in a large vacuum chamber. If the balloon were in the center and were to pop, all the air would go flying away from the center. I imagine the rate of that air would be increasing the further from the center you measure it. So the vacuum pressure would be "expanding" the air to be larger. Typically when I hear talk about the expansion of the universe it sounds more like a force within the universe that is pushing everything away. Why do we believe there is a pushing force as opposed to a pulling force? I'm sure there is a great explanation, and probably a Space Time video or two that I should watch, but I have yet to find it. Any answers would be great!
Currently working on my cosmology-based thesis and I can try to help a bit. This is a possibility! It's just nearly impossible (or actually impossible) to measure because we cannot see beyond the outer limits of our Universe, where said pulling force would be. So in short, while it's cool to think about, it is nearly impossible to tackle. We try to explain this with dark energy, a 'pushing' force within the universe, counteracting the combination of ordinary, dark, and relativistic particle matter's gravitational pull. We can explain that dark energy makes up 70% of the Universe based on CMB measurements, but we struggle to explain its position because there is no physical evidence of its 'location'.
@@hissyfits thanks for the response! Intuitive and informative 😁 Definitely an answer that makes a lot of sense. I guess since there really isn't a way to establish which one it is, it makes more sense to think about it as an expanding force since that's closer to what we see.
@@hissyfits Hi Diego, I agree with your answer but there is some evidence that it could be an external to the universe, force. That is the fact that the Universe expansion is increasing like anything that is attracted to a force in a vacuum. The closer it gets the faster it moves. André in Sydney
I can confirm. They are really a part of the video. If you pause and use "," and "." buttons to move between individual frames, you can see frames of them clearly.
Just be glad you are watching a video where not only will the presenter eloquently provide a relevant physics-based reason for the inconsistencies of a remade sci-fi movie, but that also those in the comments will appreciate and approve of the nerd-cred exhibited.
The progress in particle physics and cosmology since the 1950’s, when I was born, has been truly amazing to watch. I just hope to live long enough to see if, and how, this crisis and things like quantum gravity are resolved.
It seems like the cosmic ladder depends heavily on the speed of light through a vacuum. Is there a chance that much of space isn't a pure vacuum, causing the discrepancy?
I had never considered that, nice! For the speed of light to be affected even slightly I think it takes a very high particle density, but even so the universe has a way of exaggerating even the tiniest nuance into a blinding brilliance!
I think it may already have been: Here is the Real Crisis: The Larger Universe is Not Expanding. Photons loose energy via EM Dipole Dispersion and "evaporate" the same way as Blackholes do, due to Hawking Radiation. Hawking Radiation is the evaporative process that "unstable" particles, large or small, experience via EM Wave Energy Dipole Dispersion: EM Dipoles "Escape the Particle and Enter the Void". The Hubble Constant gauges the rate of Photon EM Dipole Dispersion, or how long it takes Photons to evaporate, not the rate of expansion of the Universe. It is not Expanding: Similar to electromagnetic radio wave energy dispersion which is governed by the "quality" or Q of the EM Wave, the Photons loose EM Dipoles over time carrying away energy. This loss of energy causes the Photon's wavelength to increase or to Redshift. This is Cosmic Redshift: Photons losing energy via EM Dipole Dispersion which take about 30 billion years to "evaporate". Cosmic Redshift has Nothing, Nothing, to do with expanding spacetime! When Photons redshift into the microwave range the rate of dispersion exponentially increases and the Photon evaporates in the microwave range. No Photons Larger Than Microwaves Exist! As the Photon finally evaporates, the frequency that the Photon evaporated at reverbs through the EM Field and will travel as microwaves (Non Photon EM Waves). This is the CMBR! The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) is the ripples left from dying Photons. Normal wavelength Photons evaporate in about 30 billion years. Some Gammas can live longer! The Observable Universe is actually ~70 billion wide as all Photons "evaporate" in about 30+ billion years due to Hawking Radiation similar to how Blackholes loose EM Dipoles to the Vacuum! The visible limit is gauged by Photon Evaporation through the process EM Wave Dipole Dispersion which can take 20 - 40 billion years depending on initial emission wavelength !!! Only stable Local Cosmic Void Expansion is occurring, no Universe wide expansion is occurring. The Universe has been stable for 100's of billions of years, if not forever! The so called Dark Energy / Zero Point Energy in the Vacuum is just the energy of the EM Dipoles Particle of the EM Field. EM Dipoles Particles have a mass less than 1x10(-118) kg each all travelling at an RMS velocity of the Speed of Light "c" and there are more than 1x10(105) EM Dipoles per cubic meter in the EM Field on Earths surface! These dipoles are in a gaseous phase while in the Vacuum and are in a liquid phase inside the Quantum Super Fluid inside all particle. QSF is a Bose-Einstein Condensate of EM Dipole Particle flowing inside all particles including Photons. Blackholes are Bose-Einstein Super Solids of EM Dipole Particles (EM Fields and Waves). After the elementary particles collapse under pressure, only super fluids of EM Dipole Particles remain! As the last inter dipole distance disappears the dipoles can no longer vibrate locally, core pressure drops to zero, collapse occurs. Blackholes are fast spinning blobs of EM Field Dipole Particles void of any other volume other than the volume left because the EM Dipole Particle packing factor is about 84% meaning there must be at least 16% of the volume of a black hole as true vacuum space! Join other brave closet physicists at BRAVE - Bożeon Research And Æther Verification Eταιρεία on fb @BozeonResearchAndAEtherVerificationEtaireia
@@johnboze Interesting theory I've never heard before. Although, all the exclamation marks and stating everything as facts makes you come off a *little* whacky and hard to take seriously.
@@BRUXXUS I agree. I have had these as unproven facts for too many years to count, so to me they have become the closet thing to fact! It is all Theory! Not Fact! I would actually tell you the mass, volume length and width of an EM Dipole but it is unproven fact and only an estimate based on many converging systems of physics equations. * Mass of a Dipole ~~~ 1x10(-118) kg each. * Length of a Dipole ~~~ 1x10(-42) m head to tail. * Width of a dipole is directly proportion to the Fine Structure Constant which is a ratio of effective area of rotating dipoles relative to its unit head to tail length of "one quantum length unit". * It's 3D shape of a "drop" has natural log and inverse natural exponent curves that govern collision forces and thus the properties of EM Fields and Waves like coalescence of dipoles. I have kept actual values close to the chest because they are wrong (incomplete estimates). Of course they are not correct, but they are getting closer as we rediscover simple logic about particles long forgotten. But as far as me stating things like fact, Neil deGrasse Tyson states as fact that "time" itself flows backwards in Blackholes. That is not a fact! The first short papers will get into simple Kinetic Dipole Theory and how small Planck Scale colliding particles can create the EM Field itself. Eventually showing how EM dipoles colliding with you causes the momentum transfer force of gravity! Yes momentum transfer from colliding EM Dipoles causes gravity and it is so simple. Math Eqs, Images, charts and animations will make the case almost full proof in most peoples minds. I am sure of it! In the mean time, ask yourself what EM Fields are actually made off. What in EM Field actually carries momentum? Your answer will change your life forever, trust me!
@@johnboze I'll admit, I'm definitely not a physicist or great at the math behind almost any of the stuff I'm fascinated with. I've just always been a huge science nerd since I was very little. One of my parent's best friends, who was almost always around as a little kid growing up was a literal rocket scientist, LOL. I'm much better at internalizing and understanding concepts and abstract ideas than working through the math. I also don't think any ideas or theories should be dismissed flat out just because it doesn't align with the status quo of current scientific understanding (unless it CAN be disproven). My question for you is how testable are your theories? If your theories are correct, I'd imagine it would be almost hilariously easy to create some technologies that were only in the realms of science fiction.
"What is it dear? ", " I'm looking at space wrong.", "There, there. You take your big telescope and try again tomorrow, you will do this. ... So, can I have the standard candles then? Your dad and I want to take a bath. ", " Mom! "
It seems like there is currently a small TH-cam compression issue. We found that if you try refreshing the page more than once it diminishes the glitches giving you the classic "Smooth Space Time" rather than "Chunky Space Time"
My cousin is almost ready to release his theory that potentially solves the hubble tension problem. I'm excited to see if his work ends up on your show.
I find it strange we think uniform distance light that originated from the recombination time would measure the same as light coming from different times and distances in space. I would almost expect a difference. Curious what the paper will say.
"The most exciting thing for any scientist is when something they thought they knew turns out to be wrong" I think we've got a ton of excitement ahead of us then.
Do we, though? You might be surprised at how rarely new theories are able to disprove and overtake previous scientific consensus. That’s what makes it exciting.
@@Unethical.FandubsGames Your statement is a perfect example of "when something they thought they knew turns out to be wrong". But "exciting" may not be the best description of when you find out you were wrong.
"We don't really know what time is... nor space for that matter... nor matter when you think about it... and what even is thinking... I'm gonna go lie down now."
So true. 99.99% of what can be known has never been observed and therefore tapped. All these assumptions are just that. And we know what happens when we assume. An arrogance that blinds wilfully...
I’m currently in my last semester as a physics major, taking a course in cosmology. These videos are excellent supplements for our lectures, its nice to get away from the math a little bit lol.
I'm starting to think that a good deal of Feynman's genius was less in coming up with creative ways to look at things, and more in saying them out loud.
Mathematicians have ruined science. They threw away infinity as the correct answer to many sums. The universe is infinite in space and time but they had to get the Popes approval so they made it have a beginning.
@@fivish what? Do you have an example of a sum mathematicians deny is infinite which really is? Are you saying you don’t believe some infinite series can converge to finite sums?
You think you're "smarter than the average bear," until you see this. Then realize you may not as smart as you thought, but smart enough to know, that you are not smart enough. Kind of inverse Dunning-Kruger Effect?
@@elultimo102 this is a big part of it. I find physics to be so cool, but Quantum and Einsteinien physics are just so complicated and deep I enjoy keeping up without truly understanding.
@@stefansneden1957 Unfortunately, I was ruined by the fiasco called "new math" by age 13, along with many of my generation. Thus, anything beyond long division is impossible for me, and why I'm not an engineer or programmer. I was "volunteered" for the experiment, without any input from my parents.
@@fivish Thank those "jokers" for your GPS, for your massively efficient farms, for new and more efficient power sources (solar power, wind power, nuclear power, and better batteries), for your advanced medical equipment (such as MRIs, heart valves, radiation treatments, x-rays in drug development), for your internet, for more efficient electronics (see quantum computers), and for your extremely powerful military. Idiot. Source: www . usparticlephysics . org / brochure / benefits /
No I'd be interesting if they find out that the universe isn't actually expanding. But there's massive Galaxies or black holes that are slowly pulling everything to them along with us being pulled to one of them
The acceleration has to be even in all directions. Observable universe = finite mass - beyond the observable universe = infinite mass. So the weak force of gravity (locally) can't fight the infinite force of gravity in all directions around it. Regardless of the distance matter is stretched apart from each other (galaxies etc.), there will always be infinite gravitation in every direction from any point in the universe. That's your 'Dark Energy' - gravity. Which is also handy as expansion is good evidence that matter is infinite throughout the infinite spacetime of the unobservable universe. I'll collect my noble prize on the way to the bar.
14:25 "Your velocity through spacetime, also called your 4-velocity is just the change in the spacetime interval divided by the change in time." It's important to note that it's spacetime interval per unit of your, subjective, or "proper", time - time from your perspective, in your reference frame, the reference frame of the object whose 4-velocity you're describing.
How about the role of time dilation when it comes to the expansion of the universe? Assuming there'd be a constant growth of space everywhere, it might expand faster where more time passes, and slower where less to no (black hole) time passes due to constant speed of light? That would explain why from our pov the universe expanded extremely fast in the beginning and why now we still observe an accelerated expansion although so much subjective time passed. It never was different! It just depends on where in space time you observe. Any thoughts on that? One example: If you are a particle that gets thrown far away to a less dense area in the first moment, millions of years will pass while you observe the expansion of the universe. If youre a particle close to (the original?) singularity, it only takes a second for the universe to expand. Both are correct! Pls some expert tell me why my thoughts are wrong or if somebody already tried to think that way?
Time operates in such a way that if one were looking at this straight, horizontal line then each moment zags more or less deeply as a moment is "enriched," getting more out of an "instant" (point) of time, A to B a peak rather than a simple straight line, that is.
It seems backwards to me. During the inflationary epoch time should have passed very slowly due to gravitational time dilation. But yeah, the idea has merit
Suggestion- break out the comment responses section into its own video so you don’t have to cram two weeks worth of comment responses into one when you miss a week. Also I enjoy that section so please do more of it 😁
"We're all traveling at the speed of light..." Actually, everything, including light is moving through Spacetime at the speed of Causality. I do wish we'd drop this speed of light fixation in the general population. It kind of puts a big roadblock into understanding things.
Totally agree, especially since “speed of light” when used casually really means “speed of light in a vacuum” which just further confuses people the first time they hear about light moving slower in different materials, or things moving faster than light (in a certain material).
If i run faster then the speed of light away from earth 500 million light years away and use sweet binoculars to look back at earth, will i see our first born ancestors?
I thought the same. I'll never understand the eagerness to accept dark energy and matter as science fact instead of the hypotheses they are. It just reminds me of aether that was used to explain how light traveled through space bc scientists of the time just *knew* light needed a medium to travel through. Maybe there is something inherent to spacetime we just don't know yet that explains the phenomena.
It's just semantics. They mean "whatever it is that is doing that" when they say "dark energy was discovered" instead of any actual empirical/testable discovery towards any of the actual Dark Energy hypotheses/details.
...I think that it is inaccurate to say that "dark energy was discovered". Dark energy was postulated as an explanation for the apparent accelerating expansion of the universe. The measurement data comes pretty close to indicating a steady expansion of the universe and. if there is just a tiny bit of error in the measurements, the expansion might actually be decelerating. We cannot take into account with accuracy the difference between Euclidean distances and distances which are altered by the many gravitational wells between us and the observed "standard candles". We know that there can be enough difference in transit times to result in a readily measurable difference in the arrival times of luminal evidence of a singular event as the light evidence is subject to gravitational lensing. There is enough evidence of deviation of light transit time to place all measurements using these "standard candles" in doubt to a slight amount. It might make as much sense to assume that the extrapolated "accelerating expansion" is the result of optical aberration as to assume that the apparent acceleration is real and thus demanding of a new force or energy which is not predicted or explained by any theory. ...Rather than postulating that the nature of dark energy might have changed over time, it might make as much sense to propose that the vacuum permittivity and vacuum permeability of space changed over time as the mass density of the universe declined and that distance evaluations of ever more distant phenomena are thus inaccurate.
@@cosmicHalArizona That's my point. They're saying it's not constant. So it shouldn't be called one. Like "coefficient of lift", which is something that depends on factors that are subject to change. There's no such thing as a "lift constant". If the universe is expanding at an increasing rate, the "Hubble constant" isn't constant. They didn't know that before, when they named it. Now they do. So, change the name to reflect the facts. Or not. It's not like the average person uses the name every day...
Urban Decay Primer Potion and All-Nighter Setting Spray-- let the primer dry down, then mix a gel liner with the spray on the back of your hand before applying. If you make a mistake, use a silicone based primer and a tiny brush to clean it up, nothing oil or water based. Set around the outline of the liner with a translucent or skin toned powder on a small brush. If only deep questions about the universe were so easy to answer 😅
there are times that i watch this guy at 0.75 of normal speed!!! nothing against him, he is a very good communicator!!! but sometimes he talks fast as the last train is leaving and he is trying to catch it!!! two thumbs up...keep going the great job!!!
Once and for all, Stormtroopers are excelent marksman, they where ordered to miss intentionally to trick the scummy rebels into revealing the location of their base....
@@randomaccessfemale politicians don't check data to verify assumed knowledge, they check social media to see which uneducated opinion is more popular.
In my experience, variance of such magnitude tends to be more than just measurement error, but a variable that is not being observed. Could the density of these galaxies count for as co-variance? Or perhaps the age? Or perhaps something more obscure, like dark matter density?
Maybe gravity? Other celestial bodies or maybe even our own gravity warping the light a tiny bit? The errors would stack up after multiple measurements to become more substantial.
given that the measurements of the early stages of the universe confirm one another (CMB and BAO) and the modern day measurements also confirm one another (Type-1a supernovae and Gravitational Lensing), that would suggest a rate of change in the constant being measured. You don't really need a more complicated explanation then that.
Dude! There may be some crises hear on earth but, I really do not think there is a crises in cosmology or any branch of science or physics. I think what we have been able to learn about the universe so far is amazing! I am sure we can keep learning more and maybe learn enough to avoid any crises here on earth.
Yes, because "Dark energy" and "Dark matter" are only hypothetical entities meant to plug the problems with the standard model (i.e. "missing" gravity or forces to justify the cause of this unknown acceleration). Cosmologists use it like duct tape when they don't understand what is going on.
I always thought of "moving through time at the speed of light" in terms of the spacetime diagram in regards to time dilation. Light moves through space in the most "space-like" way possible, and thus experiences virtually no time. Something then that is not accelerating at all and is "stationary" moves through space in a maximally "time-like" manner and thus crosses the least space while experiencing the most time.
Shouldn't these dense masses in the early universe have really messed with the flow of time? The colder parts of the CMB might have been a few thousand years "older" than the warmer parts. I have a feeling that this might have to be taken into consideration when you think about the path that the light took to get here.
Dark matter and dark energy are just the hole that emerges from some fundamental misunderstanding we have. You cant just be wrong and say that your actually right because mysterious unicorn energy fixes the problem.
Late to the conversation, but regarding the question "do we travel through time at the speed of light": I think it was one of the first PBS Space Time episodes I watched where you skilfully explained that c, the speed of light, is actually the speed of causation. And in that sense how can we travel through time at anything other than the rate at which anything can cause anything else to happen?
Sometimes I lament the loss of my job due to covid, but combined with a reignited passion for physics and astronomy from this inspiring channel, I'm going back to school to pursue a different degree. Thank you Matt and all the fantastic digital artists of PBS!
good luck
Good luck to you bro!
Question: Could space time be considered to be a lens?
That's really cool! Best of luck to you
I might do that.. just study away for pure pleasure as the world we know crumbles around us
Love this quote: "Love being wrong, because finding the source of that wrongness can only lead to greater understanding."
He is right about being wrong. I guess.
@@worfoz He is correct if the "scientists" are not competing for a grant because being "right" is where the money is.
I'd argue most scientists prefer *other* scientists to be wrong, and themselves to be right 😉
@@mx2000 I beg to differ, science is a team sports, you want other scientists to give you the best assists.
`You didn´t see it but I did`
@@worfoz l
Glad to know Cosmology is in a crisis; it can join the rest of us.
......@mjh zen.....Yeah, cosmologists think they have it bad?......They should read about the struggles of the Cosmetologists!!
1:09 - "the tension is now even tensor" - and I always thought we live in a matrix... 🤔
😆😆😆👍
Noooo doubt!
Lol
All my t-shirts and mugs from the 80s are now too small. Clearly showing how the Universe has expanded since then.
Hahahaha
Too funny!!!
Funny, but what if the universe, or even the multiverse, is (similarly) just a part of an ultra gigantic being that is growing? Dang! (bring on the theories, lol 😂)
@@valkeriancreator Pass the weed... it must be good stuff...
@@Rep0007 Most of the great scientists were and are potheads. That's right, you're paying potheads salaaries.
The cosmological constant, constantly changing.
These new young constants don't know how to behave properly yet!
In Futurama they increased the speed of light to allow faster than light travel
@@nohbuddy1 9001 IQ move right there.
You didn't need THE
Which tells me that CC doesn't exist. The theory is wrong
"Baryon acoustic oscillations" has to be one of the most Star Trek phrases spoken on this channel.
Lol... So true
@@JJs_playground after years of measurement and careful signal analysis, the original baryonic acoustic oscillations have been accurately recreated in the sound frequencies humans can hear. th-cam.com/video/dQw4w9WgXcQ/w-d-xo.html
@@burtosis I’m so glad that it was what I expected. :D
I wonder if our scientists have tried reversing the... polarity.
@Peter Rabbit Interplex the electromagnetic oscillators. That should clean up the signal.
If the acceleration of expansion was different at different points in time, you might say the universe has been quite a jerk.
Agreed, although it is more likely.
Booooo :p
And if Universe has been a jerk of different magnitudes over time, you could say that the Universe is snappy.
That rather hails the original ideas of General Relativity in a pretty deeper level.
Maybe even poppy
"The most exciting thing for any scientist is when something they thought they knew turned out to be wrong" - this is also the most depressing thing for any student taking a test.
Points to one of the failures in education and popular media.
There are hypotheses and theories on which we build understanding, not immutable facts of the universe.
Except this is not true for the vast majority of scientists.
I wonder 😐if the universe were to end in heat death then a universe we will never live again 😐but some how we are living as we speak you could say our lives are random but it would not make since if life was really that random i would have Ben something else but it does not seem to be the case 😐they say evolution only goes one way but what about the universe? And if earth is the only planet to have complex life it would not make since as to why our lives are not random 😐
Manbearpig.
The beginning of this video reminded my of Carl Sagan's quote about scientists -
“In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.”
case closed 👍
Underrated comment
Absolutely true
Oh... it sure does happen in Politics.... when a large donor with different opinion supports a politician, politician's opinions change instantly.
I agree
As much as I love theoretical work you gotta hand it to those experimentalists for making my life harder and harder.
You work in the field?
@@redacted5035 Which field? Higgs, Electron, Gravity, Magnetic....
Left?
Navy SEAL astronauts right 😹
Narcissistic false-modesty detected! You're not Witten, and you feel it. 🙂
@@thepowerman8952 Is that a term? If not, you’ve just described a definition I’ve been looking for years :)
"It is increasingly clear there is a hole in our understanding of the universe," is such an understatement.
I'd put it about 96%...
It was always clear to me.
It clearly works by electrodynamic principles. The galactic electric and magnetic fields show this unequivocally
@@neildown7231 every time I heard dark matter I cringed hard
@@thealphabutcher1048 Me too. Absolute nonsense. This guy is all over it:
th-cam.com/video/IMS7vFzqg7Q/w-d-xo.html
7:12 Thank you for recognizing that I am too lazy to hold my finger up in front of my face.
Bro, your ability to explain complex concepts in a simple and elegant way is remarkable. I've been learning quite a lot, thank you very much!
Are you certain he writes the scripts? I don’t know either way.
He's credited in the description
14:08
Simply put, the spacetime interval: "It's the minus of the sum of the squares of the x, y and z spacial intervals plus the square of the time interval times the speed of light."
Elegance.
I think we should give this “giant space ruler” a more legitimate effort.
...and I, for one, welcome our new giant space ruler
I second that idea....... What material should we make it out of?
@@Tom-fh3zg Pretty sure Chuck Norris has something long enough to measure interstellar distances. Or maybe they measure him, instead.
@@Tom-fh3zg I say Hydrogen plenty of materials in the universe, what paint should we use to mark out the cm and m marks?
@@Tom-fh3zg Organically sustainably grown non-genetically modified PC vegan friendly legumes. The material of choice in these enlightened snowflake times.
it's 1AM and according to my latest measurements, the distance between the couch and my bed has augmented
2 am for me and my couch just moved on it's own so now I'm sleeping on the dining table
😆😆😆👍
@@mikedoni714h4 3 AM here and the distance from the bathroom to my room has severly been blocked by two doors and a loooooong hallway
It has
Lol
I love the fact that "Dark Energy", "Red Dwarf", "Supernova" are all real scientific terms. JRR Tolkien could not have come up with anything better.
Seriously, the technobabble that scientists have come up with is more than what any Star Trek writer could come up with. yes Mr Data, please continue measuring baryonic acoustic oscillations to verify the distance to my standard siren produced by merging neutron stars, to disprove the theory that the cosmic background radiation is a better measure for cosmic inflation than predictable supernovae.
@@johnnamkeh1290 yo have you ever wondered if bush did 911 to save America
@@frenchguitarguy1091 have you ever wondered if bush did 911 to save america or to save halliburton?
@@frenchguitarguy1091 No. Because I'm not that detached from reality
We will never know if the universe is getting bigger until someone actually gets out there. Different lenses go at different speeds. When you go past different lights and temperatures your view will bend. Then you add that what you are looking at is going back in time. Lastly the universe has different densities. Not saying it can't be done and wish you good luck figuring out all these and more calculations
A crisis in science, is always a good thing. It means we learn new things.
200 years from now they'll probably think we're stupid for not seeing the blatantly obvious signs the universe hints at us.
@@sloshed-rat right
Can be similar to the pandemic ;)
"Oops, these measurements dont match" means something interesting is hiding there.
@Shneldon . Nah at most they might think our current understanding as simple, but understandable.
Stormtroopers _never_ miss. They are just firm believers in the utility of the warning shot.
Fresh clones instinctually miss their first shots.
The explanation hit me so hard,that's why as a Stormtrooper when attached to a planet had so good aim,practice with the exact same G and when moving to different planet had bad aim at least for some time....I love physics
Several warning shots
The UK has been rough today. So nice to have these fascinating and barely comprehensible videos to escape into.
Dear me, I fell asleep, the Algorithm choose what I should sleep to, but I woke on somebody telling me about 'duck energy'. I had to scroll backwards, and the energy turned out to be only dark, not duck, but at the same time much stranger than a LED powered by ducks could ever be.
Duck energy is the result of sub atomic particles called quaks
😂
LOL 😂
Well if it walks, talks and looks like a duck, it's probably an exotic matter we can't detect, that helps explain our universe.
@@walrus4046 just... Thanks
"The tension is now even tensor." Generally speaking, that was relatively funny.
haha slow clap
That actually was good
Ha❕
That is how we asians speaks english normally to make more expressionfull
You have a warped sense of humor.
Science: Bad news = Job security
That's kinda true
Soooo: bad news=good news
@@gavinriley5232 it's a conundrum
@@jonatanlindmark I love drums 🥁
@@jonatanlindmark Either that or it is a fraud.... Even NASA has had to apologise for manipulating temperature data ...
I've found that when a scientist has built his or her career on an idea and a new idea emerges that threatens their work, they are not excited in the least.
If that happened, that person would be a bad scientist
Some. True explorers are.
@@someonehiremeI agree but that would also be being human as we can all succumb to it. Psychologically criticism of their idea turns into an attack on them as a person.
It many “scientific” fields, this is exactly the case. They make all their money from just following the status quo. Not real scientists
@@someonehireme research and you’ll see nearly all great scientists eventually have this happen to them. Even Einstein to an extent
"Scientists love being wrong!"
More like, scientists love OTHER scientists being wrong.
when they base their entire life on something majority of them simply refuse to be wrong
Yeah I hate this line. They may be individually more open to being wrong than the average person, and science itself in principle wants to prove itself wrong, but scientists are people, the incentives in science often dont encourage proving yourself wrong, and theres a huge amoutn at stake, particularly from young researchers just establishing themselves, to be right
Some scientists have made a science of being wrong. Ask fauci.
The solution is to consider that the Big Bang Theory is actually composed of Multi-Big Bangs and not One Big Bang.
Meanwhile, half PBS videos are wrong because the go off the trash that was proved wrong
After all of these astro physical videos I've watched i have become the greatest astrophysicist who barely passed basic math. Ty YT.
No...not really. Consider that the present state of science is like that of the 1860s to 1880s. Science was dogmatically adhering to theories in the evolution of organisms, the Earth, and the universe. The number of scientists vilified by the mainstream community was so vast as to create the greatest concern in the community...has science as an investigative discipline failed. We are in that period once again. The failure here is that there is such an adherence to the value of the cosmological constant that they are breaking their necks to hammer the square pegs of observational data into the round wholes of theory. There are a number of resources that describe this in sufficient detail and at an approachable level. It suffices to say that this issue is having far greater repercussions in the general scientific community because again many are seeing dogmatism when a more pragmatic approach would be to re-evaluate the underlying theory. Up until about 15 years ago thats what would have happened. Today, the egos of the "great minds of our day" rule discourse. Not very scientific.
Only one Miles Mathis is dating to do any rework on physics, check him out.
Lol flat earth community beware lol
"The tension is now even tensor." Nice.
He actually said "The tension is now tenser"
That makes no sense at all dude
🤔😁👍🤔🤯✌🏽
Maybe it can be described mathematically now.
I see what he did there
Every answer always leads to two more questions
As long as we getting one answer we're still learning.
The most famous example for that is the answer for the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
This is why I find Physics so very interesting. There is always more to learn and know!
Scionce!
That's a beautiful truth!
I find it interesting that both methods using data from the big bang give different results than the other methods based on more recent events. it gives credence to the theory that dark energy changes over time.
I only recently started learning more about Physics, and there's still a lot I don't understand, but from what I have learned, all this is beginning to make at least a little more sense.
i suggest you start with small doses. I made a mistake and went on a quantum series rabbithole and it fried my brain cells. im still recuperating with lighter themes and now i can at least get asleep within half hour while before the brain was in constant thought mode and it took me two hours to calm it and fall asleep. So...baby steps :)
You know I'm no Einstein but I've spent many years learning in my spare time, with a lot of thinking when I'm not learning, and even now I have those aha moments, where I feel like I finally see some aspect of physics/qm clearly(more clearly anyways). Like someone can tell you exactly about something, but you may not have the right perspective(which can require many other understandings) to make total sense of it. You may think you do but years later it really falls into place and you realize you didn't. For me as a casual learner, it's a process, but well worth it, especially when things click and your understanding grows.
@@0ptimal By solving problems you can make sure you have properly understood what you think you have understood.
sure...I believe you
@@0ptimal same for me. I usually look at many videos describing the same thing to understand it fully
The tension is now... tensor 😂
We should get married
Glad I'm not the only one who thought that!
@@donkeyhobo34 blergh
He said "tenser" not tensor
Given that we're talking about dark energy, tensors really come in handy!
It seems that the links in the description for the Merch and Patreon are broken in the latest videos. I dont think it is just me as i checked it on several computers, thumb up so they can see it.
yeah it seems to be not working..
Agreed. It’s not working for me either.
Yeah there's a bunch of "Zero Width Space" characters at the ends of those URL's (which translate to %E2%80%8B)
Dis they fix it? Works for me
@@maxvazquez9351 Yup it is fixed on this one but still broken on the previous videos
If I listen to this episode an infinite number of times, I'll probably understand it.
man just casually drops that giant sound waves are forever baked into the universe itself
Long time watchers will know he did a previous episode about it.
your profile pic matches perfectly lmao
@@quillaja what was the title of that episode?
THE UNIVERSE WAS MUSIC ALL ALONG DUDE
@@ghableska "Sound waves from the beginning of time" I posted a comment with a link to the video twice, but it kept disappearing.
What a fantastically built explanation of the disagreement and its evidence. You guys are very needed in humanity today, thank you, much love.
Choose God. All of this will still lead to the grave where it will be meaningless.
@@jimmy5634no
A month or two ago, Dr. Becky put out a video saying that there was a ballpark number put out for the gravity wave measurement. And it put it right between the two measurements. But ya, that more data is needed when Ligo goes back online.
that's interesting, considering the refinement mentioned in the video didn't go that direction
I'm anxious to hear more news
@@hugofontes5708 her video. About 13 min in.
th-cam.com/video/OLL_8ArJIis/w-d-xo.html
a lot of "ballparking" in science, lately
One question I've always had that I hope some of you smart people can help me understand, or at least point me in the right direction, is: why is the expansion rate of the universe never talked about as an outer force acting on the universe?
I am most likely completely wrong, but the internal model of the universe I have used for a long time is to think of it like a balloon in a large vacuum chamber. If the balloon were in the center and were to pop, all the air would go flying away from the center. I imagine the rate of that air would be increasing the further from the center you measure it. So the vacuum pressure would be "expanding" the air to be larger.
Typically when I hear talk about the expansion of the universe it sounds more like a force within the universe that is pushing everything away. Why do we believe there is a pushing force as opposed to a pulling force?
I'm sure there is a great explanation, and probably a Space Time video or two that I should watch, but I have yet to find it. Any answers would be great!
I like that you're thinking outside the box. Or universe, rather.
Currently working on my cosmology-based thesis and I can try to help a bit.
This is a possibility! It's just nearly impossible (or actually impossible) to measure because we cannot see beyond the outer limits of our Universe, where said pulling force would be.
So in short, while it's cool to think about, it is nearly impossible to tackle. We try to explain this with dark energy, a 'pushing' force within the universe, counteracting the combination of ordinary, dark, and relativistic particle matter's gravitational pull. We can explain that dark energy makes up 70% of the Universe based on CMB measurements, but we struggle to explain its position because there is no physical evidence of its 'location'.
@@hissyfits thanks for the response! Intuitive and informative 😁
Definitely an answer that makes a lot of sense. I guess since there really isn't a way to establish which one it is, it makes more sense to think about it as an expanding force since that's closer to what we see.
@@hissyfits Hi Diego, I agree with your answer but there is some evidence that it could be an external to the universe, force. That is the fact that the Universe expansion is increasing like anything that is attracted to a force in a vacuum. The closer it gets the faster it moves. André in Sydney
@@SoundzAlive1 Great comment! Thanks for adding that in there :) A very good point
There's some strange artifacting going on in this video. Horizontal green bars and weird flickering. 🤷♂️
Good. I thought I was the only one seeing and no one seemed to comment about it.
Haha I thought my phone was dying… had to scroll too far to see this comment!
Glad it's them, because at first I thought it was my monitor.
I can confirm. They are really a part of the video. If you pause and use "," and "." buttons to move between individual frames, you can see frames of them clearly.
be sure to take notes of these artifacts
1:09 - "the tension is now even tensor" - and I always thought we live in a matrix... 🤔
Perhaps we do. But to know, you're going to have to make a choice: do you want to take the red pill or the blue pill?
"Shot first, Han did" - I don't know if I should be happier that I got that joke or that I understood the setup for the joke....
Just be glad you are watching a video where not only will the presenter eloquently provide a relevant physics-based reason for the inconsistencies of a remade sci-fi movie, but that also those in the comments will appreciate and approve of the nerd-cred exhibited.
I feel a bit of a masochist when I watch Matt's videos... it hurts my brain, but I get so much gratification from it.
"No pain, no gain" 💪🧠
This is like putting your dog in one place and using his leash to measure a distance.
And then the dog moves lol
and the leash stretches.
@@LordOfTheBing yes! Lol
@@LordOfTheBing Space can’t stretch just like area doesn’t stretch. It’s immaterial
Are you Sirius ? . . . Talking about the Dog star ?
@@Bassillixx......No, and don't call him sirius..--.---..-.
Han appearing to shoot first is just a time-dilation effect of home cassettes being out in stores before the movie is finished.
Go back to the evil mirror universe from whence you came. 😉
@@brianjlevine True. Because he [Han] so incredibly and obviously shot Greddo first!
@@MrEnjoivolcom1 the fact is: Greedo never even got a shot off. Han punked him.
@@brianjlevine Charges were never brought. SCOTUS refused to review the evidence.
You know time dilation is nonsense right?
Scientists love when OTHER scientists are wrong to be precise XD
Not really true.
@Erik Nilsson Scientists are human too so it's probably true in most cases :) At least until they accept it
In this case everyone is possibly wrong, so then there's no need to be embarrassed about it.
Planck said one time that generally takes too long before new concepts become accepted by new generations
The progress in particle physics and cosmology since the 1950’s, when I was born, has been truly amazing to watch. I just hope to live long enough to see if, and how, this crisis and things like quantum gravity are resolved.
Meollisa manders and tight hobble th of
Moo
It seems like the cosmic ladder depends heavily on the speed of light through a vacuum. Is there a chance that much of space isn't a pure vacuum, causing the discrepancy?
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation
I had never considered that, nice! For the speed of light to be affected even slightly I think it takes a very high particle density, but even so the universe has a way of exaggerating even the tiniest nuance into a blinding brilliance!
Big brain concept.
Candle wax
Hopefully, this gets answered next week.
I would love to see all this stuff worked out someday. It’d be great to see more funding for the science community.
I think it may already have been:
Here is the Real Crisis: The Larger Universe is Not Expanding. Photons loose energy via EM Dipole Dispersion and "evaporate" the same way as Blackholes do, due to Hawking Radiation.
Hawking Radiation is the evaporative process that "unstable" particles, large or small, experience via EM Wave Energy Dipole Dispersion: EM Dipoles "Escape the Particle and Enter the Void".
The Hubble Constant gauges the rate of Photon EM Dipole Dispersion, or how long it takes Photons to evaporate, not the rate of expansion of the Universe. It is not Expanding:
Similar to electromagnetic radio wave energy dispersion which is governed by the "quality" or Q of the EM Wave, the Photons loose EM Dipoles over time carrying away energy.
This loss of energy causes the Photon's wavelength to increase or to Redshift.
This is Cosmic Redshift: Photons losing energy via EM Dipole Dispersion which take about 30 billion years to "evaporate". Cosmic Redshift has Nothing, Nothing, to do with expanding spacetime!
When Photons redshift into the microwave range the rate of dispersion exponentially increases and the Photon evaporates in the microwave range. No Photons Larger Than Microwaves Exist!
As the Photon finally evaporates, the frequency that the Photon evaporated at reverbs through the EM Field and will travel as microwaves (Non Photon EM Waves). This is the CMBR!
The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) is the ripples left from dying Photons. Normal wavelength Photons evaporate in about 30 billion years. Some Gammas can live longer!
The Observable Universe is actually ~70 billion wide as all Photons "evaporate" in about 30+ billion years due to Hawking Radiation similar to how Blackholes loose EM Dipoles to the Vacuum!
The visible limit is gauged by Photon Evaporation through the process EM Wave Dipole Dispersion which can take 20 - 40 billion years depending on initial emission wavelength !!!
Only stable Local Cosmic Void Expansion is occurring, no Universe wide expansion is occurring. The Universe has been stable for 100's of billions of years, if not forever!
The so called Dark Energy / Zero Point Energy in the Vacuum is just the energy of the EM Dipoles Particle of the EM Field. EM Dipoles Particles have a mass less than 1x10(-118) kg each all travelling at an RMS velocity of the Speed of Light "c" and there are more than 1x10(105) EM Dipoles per cubic meter in the EM Field on Earths surface! These dipoles are in a gaseous phase while in the Vacuum and are in a liquid phase inside the Quantum Super Fluid inside all particle. QSF is a Bose-Einstein Condensate of EM Dipole Particle flowing inside all particles including Photons.
Blackholes are Bose-Einstein Super Solids of EM Dipole Particles (EM Fields and Waves). After the elementary particles collapse under pressure, only super fluids of EM Dipole Particles remain! As the last inter dipole distance disappears the dipoles can no longer vibrate locally, core pressure drops to zero, collapse occurs. Blackholes are fast spinning blobs of EM Field Dipole Particles void of any other volume other than the volume left because the EM Dipole Particle packing factor is about 84% meaning there must be at least 16% of the volume of a black hole as true vacuum space!
Join other brave closet physicists at BRAVE - Bożeon Research And Æther Verification Eταιρεία on fb @BozeonResearchAndAEtherVerificationEtaireia
@@johnboze Interesting theory I've never heard before.
Although, all the exclamation marks and stating everything as facts makes you come off a *little* whacky and hard to take seriously.
@@BRUXXUS I agree. I have had these as unproven facts for too many years to count, so to me they have become the closet thing to fact!
It is all Theory! Not Fact!
I would actually tell you the mass, volume length and width of an EM Dipole but it is unproven fact and only an estimate based on many converging systems of physics equations.
* Mass of a Dipole ~~~ 1x10(-118) kg each.
* Length of a Dipole ~~~ 1x10(-42) m head to tail.
* Width of a dipole is directly proportion to the Fine Structure Constant which is a ratio of effective area of rotating dipoles relative to its unit head to tail length of "one quantum length unit".
* It's 3D shape of a "drop" has natural log and inverse natural exponent curves that govern collision forces and thus the properties of EM Fields and Waves like coalescence of dipoles.
I have kept actual values close to the chest because they are wrong (incomplete estimates). Of course they are not correct, but they are getting closer as we rediscover simple logic about particles long forgotten.
But as far as me stating things like fact, Neil deGrasse Tyson states as fact that "time" itself flows backwards in Blackholes. That is not a fact!
The first short papers will get into simple Kinetic Dipole Theory and how small Planck Scale colliding particles can create the EM Field itself. Eventually showing how EM dipoles colliding with you causes the momentum transfer force of gravity! Yes momentum transfer from colliding EM Dipoles causes gravity and it is so simple.
Math Eqs, Images, charts and animations will make the case almost full proof in most peoples minds. I am sure of it!
In the mean time, ask yourself what EM Fields are actually made off. What in EM Field actually carries momentum? Your answer will change your life forever, trust me!
@@johnboze I'll admit, I'm definitely not a physicist or great at the math behind almost any of the stuff I'm fascinated with. I've just always been a huge science nerd since I was very little. One of my parent's best friends, who was almost always around as a little kid growing up was a literal rocket scientist, LOL.
I'm much better at internalizing and understanding concepts and abstract ideas than working through the math. I also don't think any ideas or theories should be dismissed flat out just because it doesn't align with the status quo of current scientific understanding (unless it CAN be disproven).
My question for you is how testable are your theories?
If your theories are correct, I'd imagine it would be almost hilariously easy to create some technologies that were only in the realms of science fiction.
I am glad this channel exist.
The explanation of this new crisis, and the Star Wars pun at the end *chefs kiss*. Perfection.
"What is it dear? ", " I'm looking at space wrong.", "There, there. You take your big telescope and try again tomorrow, you will do this. ... So, can I have the standard candles then? Your dad and I want to take a bath. ", " Mom! "
//y
//yyy
Ahh, it's great to see a shout out for Sabine Hossenfelder, she makes great physics content and deserves a lot more attention.
You mean a shout out? Call out usually means something bad, as in calling out your bullshit.
@@ThatCrazyKid0007 That's what I meant! I knew something didn't sound right when I wrote that comment! Fixed now.
She's kinda crazy, to put it nicely.
She seems fringe on many topics. But she has some platforms. Caveat emptor.
We don't listen to nuts, we listen to Alan Guth and Andrei Linde.
Those glitchy effects are really convincing! I wonder if they were even intended
god damn I started to question my computer's well-being because of them lol
DARK ENNNNNNNNNERRRRRRRGGGHHHHHHHHHY
I just found another video from another totally unrelated channel with the glitchy effects.
I'm 99,9% sure the error is in youtube's system.
@@GrungeMaster92 We can call the force that wants to break the universe apart , "The Dark Force"
It seems like there is currently a small TH-cam compression issue. We found that if you try refreshing the page more than once it diminishes the glitches giving you the classic "Smooth Space Time" rather than "Chunky Space Time"
My cousin is almost ready to release his theory that potentially solves the hubble tension problem. I'm excited to see if his work ends up on your show.
I find it strange we think uniform distance light that originated from the recombination time would measure the same as light coming from different times and distances in space.
I would almost expect a difference.
Curious what the paper will say.
"The most exciting thing for any scientist is when something they thought they knew turns out to be wrong" I think we've got a ton of excitement ahead of us then.
Do we, though? You might be surprised at how rarely new theories are able to disprove and overtake previous scientific consensus. That’s what makes it exciting.
You mean how quickly and violently a new idea gets shut down? Gosh I wonder why.
You got that right...1 Corinthians 1:25 - Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men
@@tupera1 Some idiot herding camels thought that sounded incredibly profound.
@@Unethical.FandubsGames Your statement is a perfect example of "when something they thought they knew turns out to be wrong". But "exciting" may not be the best description of when you find out you were wrong.
"We don't really know what time is... nor space for that matter... nor matter when you think about it... and what even is thinking... I'm gonna go lie down now."
So true. 99.99% of what can be known has never been observed and therefore tapped. All these assumptions are just that. And we know what happens when we assume. An arrogance that blinds wilfully...
"How does one be a cat?"
Pass the weed as you shuffle by. Thanks mate.
I’m currently in my last semester as a physics major, taking a course in cosmology. These videos are excellent supplements for our lectures, its nice to get away from the math a little bit lol.
Uh huh. Physics major at Jagoff Uni...
@@discblaster9210 Huh? Lol. I’m currently at the University Of Arkansas.
@@N7_CommanderShepard i bet you are, Panama Red... lol
Thank you to PBS and all of you for these cosmology talks. I always learn something new and exciting.
I'm starting to think that a good deal of Feynman's genius was less in coming up with creative ways to look at things, and more in saying them out loud.
Mathematicians have ruined science. They threw away infinity as the correct answer to many sums. The universe is infinite in space and time but they had to get the Popes approval so they made it have a beginning.
Half of genius is knowing what to say out loud and what to keep to yourself.
@@fivish what? Do you have an example of a sum mathematicians deny is infinite which really is? Are you saying you don’t believe some infinite series can converge to finite sums?
You would be surprised at how many genial people stay quiet, while many dumb people just can't shut up.
@@fivish Ah yes, the good old changing your objective analysis for the approval of the pope, standard procedure! (rolleyes)
I love this series. I also love that I find it the most difficult to understand. Eons? Got it. Deep Look. No problem. Spacetime? Wait, what?
I love not understanding things...wait, what?
@@derrickcox4233 same bro
You think you're "smarter than the average bear," until you see this. Then realize you may not as smart as you thought, but smart enough to know, that you are not smart enough. Kind of inverse Dunning-Kruger Effect?
@@elultimo102 this is a big part of it. I find physics to be so cool, but Quantum and Einsteinien physics are just so complicated and deep I enjoy keeping up without truly understanding.
@@stefansneden1957 Unfortunately, I was ruined by the fiasco called "new math" by age 13, along with many of my generation. Thus, anything beyond long division is impossible for me, and why I'm not an engineer or programmer. I was "volunteered" for the experiment, without any input from my parents.
The lead-up to that finalpun was exceptional
Finalpun? Have you been reading Beowulf?
Your explanations about cosmology is so clear
When you want to go to bed but see a new video, then fear going to bed cause you've now got new worries you never thought you were worried about
when you know so little about this that even after being enlightened you still have nothing to think about
"The tension is even tensor" GalaxyBrain puns here folks
Heavy stuff.
Bad news: There's a crisis in cosmology
Good news: a crisis in cosmology isn't a crisis for literally anyone else.
... yet...
We pay these jokers billions of dollars to make stuff up and build expensive toys. Its mostly paid for from our TAX.
@@fivish Thank those "jokers" for your GPS, for your massively efficient farms, for new and more efficient power sources (solar power, wind power, nuclear power, and better batteries), for your advanced medical equipment (such as MRIs, heart valves, radiation treatments, x-rays in drug development), for your internet, for more efficient electronics (see quantum computers), and for your extremely powerful military. Idiot.
Source: www . usparticlephysics . org / brochure / benefits /
@@fivish good. We need to move forward
@@fivish Yeah, and you pay your army to lose war after war. Talk about wasted money.
Great Gratitude for your clarity of Universal options to “This is what we’re eternally stuck with?” An incredible relief…
I do not think I can handle another crisis. Not after the you know what crisis of 2020. 🙂
yeah that Taco bell night back in 2020 was a real crisis in my bathroom. damn toilet paper hoarders. never forget.
2021 isn't over yet. I hope you're ready for 2020 dialed up to 11.
What we need is a cosmic massage. Gets the tension out of my shoulders every time.
A cosmic New Message
Love, Love, Love
So let's imagine that they find the acceleration isn't the same in all directions. That would be fun.
Would be very interesting, but so far I believe any variations are within the margin of error.
I mean what would cause space to expand at different speeds at different locations?
@@danieljensen2626 I do agree with you I just think that's it's just mistakes made on trying to get a perfect answer on something so massive.
No I'd be interesting if they find out that the universe isn't actually expanding. But there's massive Galaxies or black holes that are slowly pulling everything to them along with us being pulled to one of them
The acceleration has to be even in all directions. Observable universe = finite mass - beyond the observable universe = infinite mass. So the weak force of gravity (locally) can't fight the infinite force of gravity in all directions around it. Regardless of the distance matter is stretched apart from each other (galaxies etc.), there will always be infinite gravitation in every direction from any point in the universe. That's your 'Dark Energy' - gravity. Which is also handy as expansion is good evidence that matter is infinite throughout the infinite spacetime of the unobservable universe. I'll collect my noble prize on the way to the bar.
14:25 "Your velocity through spacetime, also called your 4-velocity is just the change in the spacetime interval divided by the change in time."
It's important to note that it's spacetime interval per unit of your, subjective, or "proper", time - time from your perspective, in your reference frame, the reference frame of the object whose 4-velocity you're describing.
10:19 *Baryon Acoustic Oscillations* definitely sounds like Matt's old band name.
How about the role of time dilation when it comes to the expansion of the universe? Assuming there'd be a constant growth of space everywhere, it might expand faster where more time passes, and slower where less to no (black hole) time passes due to constant speed of light? That would explain why from our pov the universe expanded extremely fast in the beginning and why now we still observe an accelerated expansion although so much subjective time passed. It never was different! It just depends on where in space time you observe. Any thoughts on that?
One example: If you are a particle that gets thrown far away to a less dense area in the first moment, millions of years will pass while you observe the expansion of the universe. If youre a particle close to (the original?) singularity, it only takes a second for the universe to expand. Both are correct!
Pls some expert tell me why my thoughts are wrong or if somebody already tried to think that way?
I like it. Technically the singularity was everywhere, but we are in a pretty empty area of space
Time operates in such a way that if one were looking at this straight, horizontal line then each moment zags more or less deeply as a moment is "enriched," getting more out of an "instant" (point) of time, A to B a peak rather than a simple straight line, that is.
Relative.
It seems backwards to me. During the inflationary epoch time should have passed very slowly due to gravitational time dilation. But yeah, the idea has merit
Please remember: You ARE allowed to blink. No need to dry your eyes.
I wonder if he has the same condition as Johnny Rotten.
@@aderi31415 Who? What?
limbic system/basal ganglia control due to prefrontal cortex flow state.
He has to read that teleprompter bro he can’t miss a beat
@@fatalexcerpts....Lack of flow state, to be more precise$
Probably doesn't mean much for other viewers but seeing the 7:30 black hand was soo hearth warming to me.
Suggestion- break out the comment responses section into its own video so you don’t have to cram two weeks worth of comment responses into one when you miss a week. Also I enjoy that section so please do more of it 😁
Hate to break it to ya but I think they're doing two in one so they can avoid doing two
"We're all traveling at the speed of light..."
Actually, everything, including light is moving through Spacetime at the speed of Causality. I do wish we'd drop this speed of light fixation in the general population. It kind of puts a big roadblock into understanding things.
Totally agree, especially since “speed of light” when used casually really means “speed of light in a vacuum” which just further confuses people the first time they hear about light moving slower in different materials, or things moving faster than light (in a certain material).
If i run faster then the speed of light away from earth 500 million light years away and use sweet binoculars to look back at earth, will i see our first born ancestors?
@spaz tor If you would get to the spped of light. Then you would drain all spacetime and create the next big bang
@@einsteinx2 you guys are literally over complicating things in a very pretentious manner.
No one will understand that.
Never fly into a nebula and always have some spare conduit relays.
Dark energy was NOT discovered, it was hypothesised - a very different thing altogether.
I thought the same. I'll never understand the eagerness to accept dark energy and matter as science fact instead of the hypotheses they are. It just reminds me of aether that was used to explain how light traveled through space bc scientists of the time just *knew* light needed a medium to travel through. Maybe there is something inherent to spacetime we just don't know yet that explains the phenomena.
It's just semantics. They mean "whatever it is that is doing that" when they say "dark energy was discovered" instead of any actual empirical/testable discovery towards any of the actual Dark Energy hypotheses/details.
@@letsomethingshine Agreed, it's unprofessional use of the English language.
@@letsomethingshine I'm well aware of that - it's sloppy language.
If it turns out that the expansion is not accelerating, bye bye dark energy. That's the most plausible explanation
You know what I haven't had in a way long time? Big League Chew. The grape flavor is my favorite.
Grape bubble gum is the best:)
@@josephgilliand4 I was gonna say no way.. but after thinking about it for a sec, it definitely is.
I used to LOVE that stuff !
It was originally marketed to kids to get them to chew tobacco later on !
@@markjacks3828 Major kudos for their industrial fortitude!
...I think that it is inaccurate to say that "dark energy was discovered". Dark energy was postulated as an explanation for the apparent accelerating expansion of the universe. The measurement data comes pretty close to indicating a steady expansion of the universe and. if there is just a tiny bit of error in the measurements, the expansion might actually be decelerating. We cannot take into account with accuracy the difference between Euclidean distances and distances which are altered by the many gravitational wells between us and the observed "standard candles". We know that there can be enough difference in transit times to result in a readily measurable difference in the arrival times of luminal evidence of a singular event as the light evidence is subject to gravitational lensing. There is enough evidence of deviation of light transit time to place all measurements using these "standard candles" in doubt to a slight amount. It might make as much sense to assume that the extrapolated "accelerating expansion" is the result of optical aberration as to assume that the apparent acceleration is real and thus demanding of a new force or energy which is not predicted or explained by any theory.
...Rather than postulating that the nature of dark energy might have changed over time, it might make as much sense to propose that the vacuum permittivity and vacuum permeability of space changed over time as the mass density of the universe declined and that distance evaluations of ever more distant phenomena are thus inaccurate.
I agree.
Or that dark energy is just the Electromagnetic energy shrouded in dust!
Good news, everyone.
i perfected the plague ( Dr Putrid, Hearthstone)
An excellent and comprehensive summary of the crisis, thanks a lot.
Shouldn't they rename the "Hubble Constant" the "Hubble Factor", or the "Hubble Coefficient", since it's not constant?
the hubble shuffle
A variable constant?
@@cosmicHalArizona That's my point. They're saying it's not constant. So it shouldn't be called one. Like "coefficient of lift", which is something that depends on factors that are subject to change. There's no such thing as a "lift constant". If the universe is expanding at an increasing rate, the "Hubble constant" isn't constant. They didn't know that before, when they named it. Now they do. So, change the name to reflect the facts. Or not. It's not like the average person uses the name every day...
The real crisis in cosmology is the fact that they can't make eyeliner that won't smudge.
Urban Decay Primer Potion and All-Nighter Setting Spray-- let the primer dry down, then mix a gel liner with the spray on the back of your hand before applying. If you make a mistake, use a silicone based primer and a tiny brush to clean it up, nothing oil or water based. Set around the outline of the liner with a translucent or skin toned powder on a small brush. If only deep questions about the universe were so easy to answer 😅
@@e.s.r5809 😂
@@e.s.r5809 lol
I think that would be a Crisis in Cosmetology
But I'll bet there is more spent on solving that problem than on cosmological research
Han was able to dodge Greedo’s laser beam, meaning that he can travel at superluminal speeds without a spaceship
there are times that i watch this guy at 0.75 of normal speed!!! nothing against him, he is a very good communicator!!!
but sometimes he talks fast as the last train is leaving and he is trying to catch it!!!
two thumbs up...keep going the great job!!!
"Tenser", said the Tensor. "Tension, apprehension, and dissension have begun."
What about distension?
@@netx421 I think distension is swell, of course, but it's not in the original verse.
@@NajwaLaylah when I talk about my tummy, most refrain from the mention, but what often comes to mind, is my intestinal distension.
Sounds like the sort of thing a Demolished Man would say!
Isn't that from ALfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination?"
New crisis Dark Darkness. No one knows what it is but we know it’s dark.
Once and for all, Stormtroopers are excelent marksman, they where ordered to miss intentionally to trick the scummy rebels into revealing the location of their base....
Migs Mayfeld: "I wasn't a stormtrooper, wiseass."
When I look at the Hubble tension…it blows my mind, it is so insane. I marvel and wait.
I'm amazed that Feynman was able to ask infinite questions about up to infinite slits... 🤔🤣
Some say he's still asking his teacher to this day...
He just asked it faster and faster so he could ask infinite questions in a finite amount of time.
"the most exciting thing for any scientist is when something they thought they knew turns out to be wrong"
Wish others thought processes had the same corner stone.
Imagine if politicians had it same way.
@@randomaccessfemale politicians don't check data to verify assumed knowledge, they check social media to see which uneducated opinion is more popular.
@@firdaushbhadha2597 Yeah, instead this comment section is full of idiots saying "god is real confirmed".
@@generalmartok3990 Even dumber is people thinking GR or Big Bang has been confirmed
In my experience, variance of such magnitude tends to be more than just measurement error, but a variable that is not being observed. Could the density of these galaxies count for as co-variance? Or perhaps the age? Or perhaps something more obscure, like dark matter density?
Or spacetime is more fragile than we think & galaxy's mass kinda breaks off a shape like a vynal record, spinning in the sugar-glass like surrondings
Maybe gravity? Other celestial bodies or maybe even our own gravity warping the light a tiny bit? The errors would stack up after multiple measurements to become more substantial.
given that the measurements of the early stages of the universe confirm one another (CMB and BAO) and the modern day measurements also confirm one another (Type-1a supernovae and Gravitational Lensing), that would suggest a rate of change in the constant being measured. You don't really need a more complicated explanation then that.
Dude! There may be some crises hear on earth but, I really do not think there is a crises in cosmology or any branch of science or physics. I think what we have been able to learn about the universe so far is amazing! I am sure we can keep learning more and maybe learn enough to avoid any crises here on earth.
So I'm going to tell me boss "I may be onto something".
You're on something
Would the amount of Dark energy in a given location in space affect the expansion rate of that particular area?
Yes, because "Dark energy" and "Dark matter" are only hypothetical entities meant to plug the problems with the standard model (i.e. "missing" gravity or forces to justify the cause of this unknown acceleration). Cosmologists use it like duct tape when they don't understand what is going on.
First comment to say “I don’t get it”
I stoped understanding these videos like 3 years ago
This video is probably the most easy one to understand they've released in years. Maybe try harder.
@@nihlify Erik "look everyone im smarter" Nilsson strikes again.
Bugs
@@nihlify I bet you don't get it either
I always thought of "moving through time at the speed of light" in terms of the spacetime diagram in regards to time dilation. Light moves through space in the most "space-like" way possible, and thus experiences virtually no time. Something then that is not accelerating at all and is "stationary" moves through space in a maximally "time-like" manner and thus crosses the least space while experiencing the most time.
Shouldn't these dense masses in the early universe have really messed with the flow of time? The colder parts of the CMB might have been a few thousand years "older" than the warmer parts. I have a feeling that this might have to be taken into consideration when you think about the path that the light took to get here.
You have a point....
This and the fact that light might have it's own lensing effect or displacement effect traveling over such large distances and times.
These are the best kinds of episodes - light on equations, heavy on ‘here’s what we don’t know, but we’re working on it’
And so many callbacks to older episodes where I actually know what's being discussed and I feel a progression of learning.
Dark matter and dark energy are just the hole that emerges from some fundamental misunderstanding we have. You cant just be wrong and say that your actually right because mysterious unicorn energy fixes the problem.
Dark matter and dark energy only exist within ones conciousness as it can't exist anywhere else. This video also exists there.
Late to the conversation, but regarding the question "do we travel through time at the speed of light": I think it was one of the first PBS Space Time episodes I watched where you skilfully explained that c, the speed of light, is actually the speed of causation. And in that sense how can we travel through time at anything other than the rate at which anything can cause anything else to happen?