What's actually crazy to me is how visualizations are so powerful that simply putting everything on a graph revealed new potential ideas in a field that's already so saturated.
You can calculate how fast the universe is going to grow by measuring how much mass is revealed as the universe expands. if more mass is revealed, that means that the universe will increase in mass and needs to grow bigger to maintain the Schwarzschild radius.
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 When time passes, the observable universe increases in size because more light is able to reach us. This means that time is proportional volume of the observable universe. This is similar to a black hole, because the roles of space and time are reversed past the event horizon. This is the same if the observable universe is a black hole.
@@greengoblin9567 "When time passes, the observable universe increases in size because more light is able to reach us." That's right. "This means that time is proportional volume of the observable universe." That's wrong. Please read up on what the word "proportional" actually means. "This is similar to a black hole, because the roles of space and time are reversed past the event horizon. " Yes, the roles of space and time are reversed. So what?! In what way does this make it similar to the expansion of the universe??? "This is the same if the observable universe is a black hole." Not at all!!! Actually, it's totally different, not "the same"!
I think it's certain that "the answers" to all our unanswered questions about what and how the universe *is* will turn out to be far, far weirder than we ever anticipated, or can even imagine.
Like Chase CEO JP “Diamond” (Money 🦀) Or Donald “Trump” (Wins, even in Politics) Elon “Musk” (the smell after not showering in exchange for innovation) ok this one is a joke but there is definitely a study out there that attributes success to given/family names
Quick! Calculate the expected energy loss through hawking radiation of a black hole the size and mass of the universe with the observed and expected loss of energy of our universe Noble prize is yours my friend
I love how this person put together this graph. It's something I've day dreamed about a ton. The very small & the very large & where our limits are. They theorized perfectly about the realms that are beyond our reach. Huge props to who ever made this graph. It's a great mental model
Seriously, this paper is bunk. They put the hubble radius on the graph like a physical object; it's not. Even when referring to the entire universe; it doesn't belong on the graph, the universe IS the graph.
@@kenengel620 My beef too with the video, I can understand it if they added it for reference while plotting "sizes", but materializing the observable universe as an object with distinct property feels like a stretch.
Anton, as much as you can explain these things to a dumb guy like myself, I’m still blown away from the massive information of the universe. Great vids!
just a little downplay: he’s just reading articles and this task not even quick cause when I was invested and had enough time, I observed that I was up front and he posted things i was reading weeks ago. I want to say that he is not superhuman and knows this all to present it to us, it’s “just” a news show.
@@johnn.2017 wtf. i could flew btw, but my intention was to explain that anton is not smarter than us and that tyy7760 could be like him, if he finds the time to create videos.
@@realmcafee Sorry, the encouraging part of your comment was not clear. I'm guessing that English is not your first language (which to me means you're smarter than me; I only speak one) so I apologize that I did not understand your intention. Have a great day, beautiful person!
@somescientist3821, Braintrap! Watch out, Black Holes are tricky. If we are inside a BlackHole, the accretiondisk is non existent for us. That is outside. Disprooves another assumption from the video, about the density outside. 🚀🏴☠️
yeah i noticed this a few years back that the density of the universe is very close to the critical density you would need to make a black whole of the size of the entire universe.
So if we live in a black hole... does that mean each black hole in our universe contains a universe themselves? Maybe all of reality is just an infinite series of black holes? We live in a bag of infinite holding.
Look up lee smolin and cosmic natural selection. It indeed proposes that every black hole creates another universe with slightly different laws and overtime (hence natural selection), universes tuned to creating the most black holes will become dominant, what’s more is we happen to live in one such universe which is very nicely tuned for creating black holes.
It would certainly explain where my missing socks go when the wife does the laundry. If we add up all the socks that go missing in the laundry, that mass must be somewhere. There's no black hole close enough to explain the phenomenon, but if we're already inside a black hole, that makes perfect sense.
Anton every time I listen to you I am mind boggled. you are able to explain in simple language the most complex of subjects - I think you are wonderful. God Bless You - you are the smartest person on the internet.
Did you also see where they made wrong assumptions? BlackHoles are tricky! But they solve a lot of cosmologic confusion, if thought thru to an end .... 🚀🏴☠️
He did not say that. He said its unlikely because no one knows why the external Universe should be empty. I have an explanation for that and it makes absolutely sense that it is empty. Because everyone misses the Time dialation. And the fact, that from our perspective of the time dialation "we" or our Blackhole would have swallowed everything in existance that it coukd have ever collided with literally in all eternity of time of the mother universe in one splitsecond in our time perspective. Everyone who does not understands this just misses the time dialation.
@@diefirmenwandler8667 he said we should assume we’re not living in a black hole..Word for word. And the problem is with density, not time dilation or as you’re putting it “the time dialation.” Its dilation. And there’s no “the time dilation.” It’s just time dilation. No one is missing time dilation at all, that’s a difference found in general relativity. It has nothing to do with making or explaining zero density. I’m not trying to be rude but the way you’re speaking about it makes no sense whatsoever for this topic. You wouldn’t apply time dilation as a difference for what the black hole is swallowing elsewhere and us when the issue is that there’s no zero density according to our math and to try to force there to be would contradict mountains of established physics
wow, this way of putting things together is one of the most exciting things Anton so far has brought to us! it also makes him really deserve the title "Instant Anton" !
This is an amazing paper you’re detailing. This definitely is in line with what Neil Turok is saying. Watch his recent PI public presentation. Universe is simpler that we expect it to be. Thank again for your hard work in sharing this with everyone!!!!!!!🎉
InstAnton was first introduced to me by our rock star Anton!!!! Thanks, Anton, for the InstAnton reference! I'm now on my way to an entirely new area of study!!!☮ We love you and keep on doing what you do.😀
Thanks for creating the universe Anton! I’d been wondering why the days were getting darker recently and thought it might be that winter but it must be due to the black hole we’re living in instead.
Congrats to who made this graph is so simple, since it points out something that's intriguing just by laying out what we know. 😆 love your videos Anton, my mind is buzzing with ideas and intrigue! 👍👍
I had gotten spooked when I saw this graph a few days back. Glad you could explain it so brilliant. I think a three dimensional graph of the same would stirr things a bit 🎉
The rule that an object forms a black hole when it fits inside its Schwarzschild radius only applies to static objects. The universe is expanding so it escapes this condition. However, white hole models of the big bang universe are possible if we are prepared to give up homogeneity outside the observable universe limit, and why wouldn't we be?
If somehow homogeneity breaks outside of OUR observable universe (why? are we SOOOO special?) it makes no fuckin mathematical sense that inside of any even remotely resembling black hole would be homogeneous. It pains to even here such thoughts, honestly, as Swarzshield black hole for which that radius is coincidentally similar to radius of observable universe at exactly THIS POINT IN TIME is nothing like the universe we observe. Applying Sw radius to the universe is like saying that water has consciousness because it's roughly the same density as human.
As a scientifically-literate layman, white-hole models of the Big Bang are my favourite area of speculation in cosmology. I can't explain why, but it just seems like such an aesthetically pleasing concept. I'm prepared to throw the idea away if evidence mounts against it, but until then, I'm rooting for it!
@@avelkm Humans are conscious in that they try to obey the laws of morality. Animals are conscious in that obey the laws of nature/instinct. Particles are conscious in that they obey the laws of physics by how they were designed/their observable properties. It's not a stretch when you take it down these steps. Humans came out of this universe. I think panpsychism is the most valid theory of consciousness we have at the moment. I think consciousness is best defined as what level of awareness you are at. It takes a bunch of conscious particles to ultimately create a conscious being. I don't think the cells in your body know they have created a human being, and it is certainly true these things are more aware than a rock. Eventually these multiple levels of awareness compound and stack on top of each other until we reach our level of awareness.
I do think it’s an interesting concept. The fact that the farthest galaxies are moving faster away from us always made my peasant brain suspect they’re just falling closer and closer into a black hole than we are
Finally, someone else is thinking along my idea of how we exist. We have to be inside a black hole in order of matter to exist, as energy needs to be traveling near the speed of light in order to become matter.
I've long wondered whether we experience the "arrow of time" because we are inside a black hole and are bound to always head towards the singularity. Time dilation in this context is simply the observable effect of speeding up sufficiently to ever so slightly divert our future light cone away from that singularity, thereby slowing our fall towards it (keeping in mind that time and space are swapped inside a blank hole). I'm no scientist though and these are just my own rambling thoughts. 😊
All in all we’re just perceiving a cosmic process. Time in one direction. The fact that other intelligent beings perceive time differently doesn’t seem far off. Just not the reality of our specific condition. Just endless possibilities.
That's interesting. Of course, the Third Law states that entropy in general always increases. The truth may lie in the fact that we need to move towards entropy to be able to act against it, to create order. But, if total order was the final "end state", then the universe would be entirely uniform and immovable - thus a "singularity". So, perhaps the other black holes we perceive (or rather "assume") are actually reverse running universes that we cannot reach because their "arrow of time" is the opposite of ours, and we are perceived as a simple black hole as seen from those universes.
I always viewed the "arrow of time" of physical time as unavoidably pointing towards the heat death of the universe due to the unavoidable inevitability of total entropy of the universe's _closed system_ , that its "accelerating expansion" nature is inevitably leading us towards. (Eng is my 2nd language, so pardon me if that sentence doesn't make any sense.) I wonder if anyone has ever compared these two ideas (yours and mine), and come up with a probability comparition.
Even this video ties into the argument that I present: It explains whether the universe is a closed system (i.e. it has a boundary) or an open system (i.e. no boundary -> we live inside a black hole. Turns out, there is a boundary to the extire universe, which leads to... The universe is a closed system It is unavoidably moving towards an entropic heat death This makes the arrow of time itself unavoidable i.e. _physical_ time always marches forward. Related: So, going back in time should not be possible. Hence, *reality* won't ever have to confront many of the time-travel paradoxes that such time-travel would cause. But, that doesn't take away from the fact that considering these praradoxes is still fun, and they sometimes lead to cool sci-fi stories.
I started to wonder about 15 years ago if the Big bang was a bit like the creation of black hole from the inside or a white hole. And the more I've read about the holographic Universe and Leonard Susskind work, the more is starts to make sense. And when you realize that each black hole in our Universe might become a universe, it makes the head spin.
It reminds me of a video game I’ve played called Destiny. The awoken lived within a pocket universe inside a black hole. I’ll give you lore excerpt for understanding. _---"We have detected a pattern that was imprinted into our universe by its ancestor: a fingerprint of the initial conditions into which existence was born. From this information, we have confirmed the most primordial of Awoken myths. Our universe is a subset of another. We live within a singularity, a knot in space-time, that orbits a star in another world._ _"Conventional relativity would suggest that time outside an event horizon passes quickly compared to a clock within, but our universe has a peculiar relationship with its mother. Thousands of years have passed for us on the Distributary. Outside? Centuries, at most. We are a swift eddy in a slow river._
Doesn't our Big Bang model sound alot like a large scale anti matter reaction? What if the two are connected somehow? A volume of space filled with antimatter suddenly has matter introduced and a huge "explosion" and chain reactions occur ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What a brilliant thing to do -- to get a really big picture including everything we know. I love integrating all these disparate parts and concepts into one graph -- but I never would have had a clue what the graph meant. Thanks, Anton, for using your great gift of teaching to help me comprehend so much more every day. You are like an " Inst-Anton" for the universe of my scientific mind ...
The opposite side of the graph is an anti-universe, where basically everything is inverted. The negative density, or zero density, would be maximum density of antimatter and zero density of matter. So even time could be negative, meaning the opposite of our sense of time, where entropy increases indefinitely, this negative would be similar to watch time in reverse where entropy “decreases” in relation to our sense of time. Well, that’s my interpretation.
People think way to much in jing and jang.. i mean, darkness, whats it really? Its the absence of light, and not its own thing. Coldness, its not its own thing to, its the absense of heath.. i dont think a “shadow realm” like you suggest exist. There could be one, but it wont be a plain inverted copy of our universe atleast.. a lots of negatives dont really exist but ate just defined by human to make our realm make more sense.. another one, what is silence? Its not an anti sound, its just no sound..
@@ClosestNearUtopiayou have a point but so do they; both matter and antimatter exists and act as two sides of the same thing. The absence of antimatter in the Universe, and thus the opposites being imbalanced, could be explained by their hypothesis. However, as you say, other non-physical properties like entropy and time being inverted is questionable, especially since antimatter functions exactly the same as matter with regards to the laws of the Universe.
@@kingdmind yes its true some things do have a negative if itself. But are they really the inverse of what we think it is? I mean If i will play a song, and will play the same song with the phase inverted, it will cancel each other out and the sound will be gone. Just like how we make active noise canceling. So we cancelled out noise with noise, and not noise being canselled out with anti noise we cant perceive, by listening to the tracks separately there is also no way to tell if a sound is a invert of itsself since it already consited out or a wave. Just like how we mix sinuses its is possible to cancel things out with more of it.
You should read "A Clash of Cymbals" the last of the "Cities in Flight" series by James Blish, in which he posits something very like this, with an anti-universe that's approaching our own an will shortly intersect with it.
@@davidandrews2972 so what if, what if our counter galaxy will meet, will that mean we end up in a paradox not existing and or even be erased from time, will we crystalise? Whats going tho happen!!
We are so fortunate to be living in a golden age of scientific discovery, and to have charismatic personalities to translate the technical into the digestible. Cheers Anton!
We must be in a black hole. There is some spin and charge to make things a little more tricky, but basically, any point in space is a black hole at some point, because r
If we live in a black hole, therefore in a confined space, this wouldn't explain dark matter? Think for a minute, we know that massive objects distort space itself, therefore the space itself has some type of fluid characteristic, like when you put a object in a container with water, and you move the container, the object will have resistence against the fluid, why not the objects in the observable universe behave the same way?
If space is a fluid it would be something far exceeding a superfluid, and so it woulsnt care about friction or resistance. Dark energy could be the evaporation of our hypothetical black hole universe. The universe is losing energy and getting colder. And this is the effect dark energy has on the energy density of our observable universe.
No gas in space to push. No flying or swimming. Fluid dynamics goes out the window when there is only radiation and virtual particles. Virtual particles are "real" particles that come into existence long enough to interact with its anti particle. They quickly destroy each other. This is the premise of hawking radiation.
I'll try. If BigBang is a BlackHole, just only observed from the opposit end, it would show dark forces as fairy tales, what they truely are. Thats about as far as anybody can get out of yout writing.🚀🏴☠️
You are on the right track. Space can’t be in the same space at the same time. That is to say, planckspace cannot superimpose itself on another’s instance of planckspace. This means that space itself behaves like a particle. Wrap your head around space as a particle and everything will start making sense.
8:41 It's about damn space-time, we named something after Anton! 2:24 I had the opportunity to listen to Prof Charles's lectures on astrobiology during my post-grad. Truly an amazing person and a passionate researcher!
So light can’t escape a black hole but trillions of stars can live inside of one? Matter that gets to close to a black hole gets spaghettfided and pulled in but trillions of planets and stars can live inside of one? This is wild and I’m here for it.. awesome content!
It gets even wilder. But first, that decreasing density of increased BlackHole is a huge 💩. We see only the shadow of BH. The actial BlackHoles are a dot in spacetime. A point without radius or without dimension.🚀🏴☠️
This. It could be endless, made a posit via comment a few videos back about this: an endless loop from one point to the other, universes within each black hole within each universe. How insane would it be if it were true 🤔
Is it possible for a black hole to get so big that it just suddenly dissolves because it's density does not allow it to retain its nature of being a black hole?
That's basically the end result of Hawking Radiation, no? The Universe just hasn't existed for long enough for any naturally formed Black Hole to dissipate this way. Iirc, plenty of man-made black holes have destroyed themselves thanks to this phenomenon. This was the source of the backlash regarding the large hadron collider when it first started running, because its collisions create miniature black holes, and we didn't have conclusive proof yet that they wouldn't escape containment and consume the planet.
@@thedeemon Thank you for the answer, while watching the video the idea of a black hole growing so big and losing it's density enough to not be a black hole anymore would probably result in a really big bang. Next question, how fast would the universal expansion rate need to be to tear apart a black hole?
@@MasterElements Remember that black holes, as they are described in GR, are vacuum solutions of Einstein equation: all their mass is concentrated at the singularity (point or ring), and the rest of the volume is empty space. That's what allows them to have formally low density - you divide the mass in singularity by the volume of empty space around, limited by the horizon. So this low density doesn't mean the black hole is weak or smth. So, even if there is strong space expansion factor, since BH's mass is still concentrated at singularity, nothing can make it unwrap or tear apart.
InstAnton... Very appropriate! I also find it interesting that the creation myth of the tribes in Bukidnon province, Northern Mindanao, Philippines says that creation happened in a very small place called the "Banting". My wife is a Higaonon tribeswoman from Bukidnon. Of course, within the Banting was Diwata Magbabaya, the Creator, and two other beings. Magbabaya had the thought that created the universe, while one of the other beings had the matter, and the other held up the Banting. I find it interesting that the concepts of cosmology are quite similar to this.
- There is a lot to my comment, I hope you read it. I think I have an idea for what see as space might actually be and I would like to think anyone always existed. I think if to somehow safely fall into a black hole space just shrinks and maybe any atom not quite nearby could see such as being made up of stuff like galaxies and stars and what ever basically. Like why space are dark and suffocating are because are extremely close to an area of a black hole. Maybe like the so called "Ho'oleilana" structure which are basically maybe this area of space which are made up of many galaxies that maybe form the shape of a sphere and I guess the "bootes void" which are this empty area of space that are perhaps in the very center. So maybe what are seeing are actually an atom. There are maybe people on the internet talking about Ho'oleilana to do with so called "big bang theory" of it being a I guess a 'reverberation' of this big bang, however I am certain it is just an atom. This Ho'oleilana area basically from what I've seen I guess are just next to where the milky way are located in the so called "Laniakea" supercluster, which are kind of similar to Ho'oleilana being made up of many galaxies. However, Laniakea are maybe not as this big spherical shape like Ho'oleilana. I think how to describe what Laniakea looks like are maybe like the shape of chaotic electricity. Maybe even technically Laniakea really are electricity for that matter.. Can probably look this stuff up on google to see what I'm talking about. Like a reference image. So on that regards, I think maybe if to somehow zoom into someone's brain, into someone moving down a neuron as electricity then perhaps would see that person appear as a literal black hole. Maybe to explain 'gravity' / energy are the act of a person 'knowing' / thinking into their existence. And so, how a person moving down a neuron as electricity for a moment and then maybe once reach the very end of the neuron are converted into a chemical called a 'neural transmitter' and sent out of the neuron. The person are now maybe having been formed into an atom of this neural transmitter. The person just floating around in the brain as a neural transmitter, maybe extremely close to a receiver end of another neuron. If the person enters into the receiver end of a neuron then maybe would be converted back into electricity, now moving down the neuron had just entered. So in that regards technically any brain are perhaps where a person live, like a person that live as a human or a chicken or a cow or pig or monkey or mouse for example. How the concept of a brain work logically are 'neural networking that learn off of self', which basically mean a person able to think their own thoughts. The person are not a mindless gear in a big machine, the person just live their very own perspective, unlike anyone else. The brain, to try to describe it as basically just a house, which any person can inhabit. Maybe just by pure chance someone end up taking that house for theirself. Maybe technically someone could take over someone else's brain for that matter, maybe like if someone hooks their brain up to someone else's brain, who ever thinks the most takes the other's brain and now live in both brains.. Maybe someone with a bigger brain can more easily take over someone with a smaller brain for example, maybe it depends on how much neurons someone controls. Maybe if someone had their brain taken away from someone else like previously having both brains connected together then perhaps the person escape as heat or also are pushed aside as some biological material in the body somewhere. Maybe what 'death' really is, is literally just falling apart. No entering any afterlife or changing being or something like that, no disappearing forever - literally just falling apart, that's it, yet still technically there. Therefore, technically could potentially be brought back alive again. Maybe someone use technology to save someone that had fallen apart, excavating them out of the ground and put them into a new brain with new body to live again. Or maybe alternatively the person that had fallen apart, say maybe had broken down into the ground, by pure chance say were soaked up into a blueberry plant into a blueberry and say someone else who live as a crow bird eat them up and are now processed by the other persons crow body and turned into a small brain as a baby crow in an egg and maybe eventually hatching out of the egg and living as a crow. If someone are brought back alive some way, maybe they could potentially end up forgetting their past memories maybe due to being distracted by an alien environment with nothing recognizable the person might have seen back then. And maybe if have a small brain and instinct could make it easier to be distracted from any past memory as well. And so, should bring anyone back into a big enough brain and ideal body immediately. Maybe a way to prevent the person from forgetting their memories and turning into a blank slate could be to try to help them remember their past memory by showing an object that person might have seen back then. Ie maybe someone seen the great pyramid of Giza back then, maybe as soon as it was being built and maybe completed, maybe by seeing it now can help them remember who used to be back then. - I think probably the great pyramid of Giza was not intended for that purpose and just only meant as a burial for this person called Khufu originally. Another idea could be to use technology to look up their past memories and show their memories maybe directly into their vision like a VR headset but directly into their brain, or maybe also on an external display screen for example if were seeing stuff with eyes. So maybe that can be another way to potentially help someone remember who used to be back then. Maybe what see as a 'rock' being made up of many atoms are actually many people's very existences clumped up to form that rock. Maybe a huge lightning bolt are literally a persons very existence moving down into the ground. Lastly, in regards to 'death', should definitely sign up to get frozen at some facility if to die with potential possibility to be rescued and brought back alive again in the future via advanced technology. Like there is this place called 'Alcor' which can either get just brain preserved for 80k$ or 200k$ for entire body. Alcor might be one of the better options since at that place might be using at least a more advanced preservation technique like injecting a special fluid into the brain and maybe also body vs some another facility with just freezing. The special fluid I think prevent like brain neurons from breaking down vs just freezing. However being preserved when die like with just being frozen are perhaps better than nothing. If not preserved kept in place then could potentially end up suffering due to falling apart and seeping into the ground and being exposed to the outside weather and potentially coming back say as a small animal or wherever environment do not remember - and being distracted from past memories. I think I have heard of another facility called 'Cryonics Institute' which might be cheaper since that maybe are just freezing. In all honesty, anyone should be preserved freely at such a preservation facility like Alcor. Infrastructure like that needs to be mass produced. Maybe could send any dead person to a vault in Antarctica that can fit many people and be easily extendable - or maybe off planet underground and safe on the Moon for example. I hope read all of it in order to make sense potentially. Should be careful so as to not suck all the air out of someone and give each other some space while also must never leave anyone behind. If someone really up to no good - like not ethical, should ideally stop that person without harming that person. If have the 'bring back alive again technology', still must never want anyone to get harmed. See someone else as living just like you. - Maybe someone wants to harm others, ideally can just talk the person out of it or maybe can grab and then communicate to the person. Or maybe use a net or 'bolas' launcher like thing with rope and weight on either end; said device should launch a soft yet strong thing to capture them, ensure soft to ensure do not cause harm. Maybe net or bolas are sticky to grab onto someone more easily as well. Or maybe use a special launcher device that can launch tons of rubber sphere's in quick succession; like a water balloon filled with contact adhesive to literally glue onto the person to stop the person from being able to move their body - do that while also avoiding suffocating the person. - Maybe instead of using a drone to drop a bomb onto someone, drop a rubber sphere filled with contact adhesive, maybe many drones all after a single person for example. - Maybe if in a chaotic situation with weapons shooting all over the place maybe after having harmlessly captured someone to use an excavator with claw on it that had been rigged up to be remote controlled to drive over to the captured person and remotely and carefully pick up the person. Excavator claw should also ensure be soft as well so as to not cause harm. -- In a chaotic weapons all over the place situation should also only use a weapon against someone else's weapon while avoiding causing harm. Don't just lock someone up and forget about them, need to communicate for as long as it takes to convey ethics to just live around and not harm each other, by not harming them. Maybe eventually can get through and someone change from being in the wrong. So, that is what I needed to say. Should figure out at least an idea about how maybe what ever really works.. Maybe anyone really always existed and never had a beginning nor ever end. I need to repeat, must never leave anyone behind. Maybe not alone.
How much energy would it take if you concentrated it in one place before you make matter appear according to E=mc^2? And what would happen if you concentrated that energy at the centre of a black hole and a piece of matter came into existence? Would the black hole turn inside out?
I think according to this graph, the Instanton's mass might be the number you're after. But it's mass/energy and density together that allow the two to interchange. More accurately you could ask: What's the smallest possible amount of energy I could condense into a very small point and end up with massive particles?
Oh my sweet child... (no). You can have an answer for that. Open Wikipedia and look for mass of any "matter" particle. They are expressed in eV (MeV for protons and neutrons) which are ... units of energy!!! We create matter from energy all the time in particle accelerators, it's what they are built for. And it's not a lot at all.
kind of answered your own question there! how much matter do you want? 90 million billion joules will get you a kilo according to e=mc^2. if you only wanted a breadcrumb, say then 90 gigajoules should get you a decent one. of course, density and avagadro, binding energy of a nucleon etc. are going to complicate things somewhat and atoms are famously empty so you would have to distribute the energy fairly unequally over the expected volume of your wanted material.... yeah. not as easy as i thought it'd be.... anyway, 90 jiggajoules is the energy content of 750 gallons of gasoline. if you could burn all that within the space of a breadcrumb then you'd get a toasty, tasty result! :)
I think a simpler way to marry quantum physics and classical mechanics is to try to create particles out of nothing but gravity and light. I think the key reason particles exist is because it isn't possible to hit a singularity. Anything that would move toward a singularity would miss it. If that thing is attracted to the singularity somehow, it would necessarily orbit it. The orbit could be infinitely tiny but it would never be able to hit it. The movement would never end. I think fundamental particles are light orbiting infinitesimally tiny singularities.
Infinite focus on a time variation approaching zero… mix this limit (which is the definition of derivate) with Laplace Transform, but in frequency domain
that would be an interesting idea, but singularities that small would dissipate away thanks to hawking radiation, by way of the singularities pulling apart the spontaneously generating particle-anti particle pairs Unless they're not gravitational singularities, I guess
An expanding universe implies a point of origin. Should it be assumed that since the observer is always the center of the observable universe that there is no point of origin beyond the observer?
In all likelihood it isn't expanding. The theories on the expanding universe have struggled a lot to stay afloat in light of younger galaxies exhibiting the same observable effects as the older galaxies in many cases. That said, it's possible everything is getting smaller, which creates the effect of things moving away from us/shrinking. If you were standing a few feet away from me and started shrinking to the size of an ant, it's easy to say you're shrinking, but if you're a quarter mile away and I can't even tell what direction you're facing, it looks like you're moving away from me. If the James Webb telescope has discovered anything, it's that we had barely a clue as to how far things actually are. At this point it's looking like the speed of light isn't so much a factor in our ability to see out into the universe as our ability to see things relative to other things to gauge their real distance.
@@grawss >That said, it's possible everything is getting smaller, which creates the effect of things moving away from us/shrinking. I'm glad this idea is catching on, in combination with a fractal-like universe of black holes inside black holes.
Assuming that intergalactic space contains a given number of atoms per cubic meter, we can predict a consequence of math for the absorbing and scattering of photons as it passes through light years of said space. Factoring in interstellar space, we have a greater impact on said photons. This is called attenuation and it gives the impression of expansion. Go put a magnifying glass on some very small print. Inside the relative bubble of the magnifying glass, all the print is readable. Outside of the bubble everything is micro print. By moving the magnifying glass you can change the relative position of "now" and "here". In this way our galaxy appears as a fuzzy red blob from the fuzzy red blobs we are seeing with our telescope. Hope that helps you. Basically the universe is as developed there as it is here. The fuzzy red blobs are now fully formed Galaxies in the bubble of their own relativity but we can't see them as they currently exist.
@Anton Petrov Please read this: I have a somewhat broken time perception which makes me able to percieve time kind of as one singular piece. I tell since more than a decade even since before I have ever heard from that believe from anyone else, that we live in a blackhole. And I also think that we see the things at the edge of the universe in realtime. Just that the time there runs infinately slow compared to ours (from the outside perspective - not from ours). And the same goes the other way around. Also the speed of light towards oneself is infinitely fast and the other way around its half the "speed of light c". Making the information speed equaling C. (There is a nice Video about it why mankind has never really measured the actual speed of light and its also not colliding with the relativity theory) And even albert Einstein said his concepts are only true if what I said is assumed to be wrong.) The attribute of this configuration causes oneself to be always the one thing in the universe that moves the fastest through time. But at the edge of the event horizon we run infinitely slow viewed from everything outside the Event horizon. Because viewed from the outside we are a singularity like a punct like entity where the time runs infinitely slow. So what does it mean. That means that from outside perspective. The universe should have appeared in a split second at the beginning (to our timestandards (consuming the Star or whatever comparable entity accumulated the mass in the beginning.) In the center it would have formed, and then expanded as long as the "star like entity" collapsed into it. Then the time dialation kicks in. From the inside as it runs infinitely slow compared to the outside. All the time of the external universe from the outside will have passed within the fraction of a second from our inside perspective. So everything that this Blackhole will ever collide with within Quadrillions of Quadrillions of Millenia will happen in a splitsecond from our perspective until there is nothing that can further all into it. (Dropping the density outside to Zero). Because everything that could have ever been fallen into the Blackhole ever, happened in the first second of our Universe. So the density outside is zero exept all other Blackholes that had escape velocity at one point. So our universe probably expanded ridigulously fast in the beginning filling everything then gettin filled even more but slower and then slower and slower until nothing could fall into it anymore throughout eternity and then it just expanded into the direction of time. (Once spacial or time dimensions run to infinity they flip on the axis and become the other.) It absolutely makes sense. We live in a blackhole. And I have more arguments but if anyone has a different opinion please prove me wrong.
I always wondered if black holes were just more universes since I don't see if there are any observable white holes. I had the idea that maybe all that matter is just another big bang for another universe.
I would honestly not surprised if this were actually the case. It makes intuitive sense if you vaguely understand the concept of black holes and just how the universe functions.
The universe in a blackhole would explain a lot. The big bang would just be when it condensed so much it exploded within an that explosion equalized the gravity within that's why are see able universe is expanding at light speed but doesn't look like to us so we are moving thru time and not space. And it would explain how subatomic particals appear from nothing and dissappear because it is matter being pulled in from an outside universe being smashed and sometimes being ejected out of the blackhole. I think it would be cool if most massive blackholes had a smaller universe inside them doing the same thing.
the mathmatical model of a blackhole and out universe have been very similar for decades, this isn't really new, just a new visualization of it. this makes sense also. i first saw the models in one of Stephen Hawking's books from over 20 years ago. it makes you wonder about some things.
No, because physics are universal, and it will not matter if we find unknown phenonema compared to what we think are the physics. We will just build the new rules on the existing ones.
Anyone who can say flat out no is not thinking about this question critically. Any number of insights could change the way we view physics. While sufficiently dependable, the standard model is still only theoretical. In this scenario it could be that nothing changes and we're just as ignorant as we were before learning about our black hole universe, but let's be willing to keep an open mind at least. I'm still waiting for proof for EU!!!😂
@@YantisOm the basics of “physics” doesnt change.. how many physics we have even? Gravitational, kinetic, electron, quantum. Their al physics, and never ever changed the way we see physics. That is does change hoe we see the world is something entirely different. Physics is just a term for anything accouring in nature being described mathematically.. Also, did you really liked yourself just now!? 🤣🤦🏼🫠
@@ClosestNearUtopia Electron physics completely changed the way we viewed physics at the time of its discovery. Quantum research has done the same, physics changes as our understanding changes and our ability to express it gets more accurate.
The instaton is a wormhole that acts as an exit for only spacetime (matter is too big to transverse). There are entrance wormholes all around the universe, like at the center of many galaxies. This makes the universe a sort of Klein bottle.
A question: if a blackhole is created by a super massive star collapsing, does that mean that universes are created from such thing happening? It just seems so obscure and unlikely
As others have mentioned, you must also consider time dilation and the reversal of time & space inside a black hole. From the point of view inside, all of time has happened regarding all that is outside of it. Perhaps a constant recursive situation between all black hole universes.
@@NefariousKoel buddy time dilation is appropriate for describing effects around or near a black hole. Not inside a black hole. Again you people are running around acting like you understand time inside a black hole
It honestly makes zero sense, implying that we are once again somehow special and are situated just in the center, and also somehow universe is homogeneous on a big scale and then suddenly stops. I highly doubt black holes are homogeneous inside, it doesn't make any sense. But Anton already said that it breaks all physics. Intriguing coincidence though.
5 billion years ago it's not that the universe was smaller. It's the fact that long ago no one was observing the universe per se, and had no tools to observe as far as we can today. Currently, our biggest hurdle is getting data beyond what we can currently observe which will require better tools and advancements in technology. Even then we will still not be able to answer every question as I'm sure even more questions will arise.
That's an interesting question. I like your thinking/reasoning skills. My interpretation of your question is this: Since the universe has been expanding (and accelerating) during the last 5 billion years but the mass has remained constant, the mass density ratio of the universe is lower today than 5 billion years ago (and is constantly going down over time as the universe continues to expand). In short, today the Hubble Radius is on the line as shown at 6:08 in the video but would not have been on the line 5 billion years ago when the universe was smaller but had the same mass (a more dense universe). If my understanding of your thinking is correct then the answer to your question is no. Your reasoning is fine but when dealing with (natural) log scales, perspective changes extremely fast. One unit of change on the graph is an order of magnitude. Two units of change is two orders of magnitude and so on. In short, the volume of the universe could double, triple or quadruple and it would be a minor nudge on the graph. If it helps, imagine the Empire State building (102 floors). If we represented it in natural log floors, it would only be two stories tall. The average building in the US is ten stories or less (1 natural log) while the Empire State building and all taller buildings are only 2. We would have to build a skyscraper 1,000 stories tall to make a 3 story natural log building.
In a way we are in a black hole. Because of the increasing expansion of the universe there are parts of the universe we will never 'see' and will never 'see' us because expansion is moving us apart to quickly for light to ever travel that increasing distance. This is called the Lambda horizon. However that also means every part of the universe will at some point become its own 'black hole' as it relates to distance other parts. Though I think its more of an event horizon than a singularity.
🕉It was quite funny to see how Anton just realized that he was the center of the universe and the cause of everything in his life that manifests itself from instant)🙏
Imagine when he finds out we are him and he is us, that we all exist simultaneously in infinite space time nexi, time-space nexi and ‘out’ of time and space. 😊
About 30 years ago, I was lying in bed working out the likely "Schwartzschild Radius" size to calculate whether the Universe could be a "black hole" that would not need extreme phenomena happening within our visible universe. I decided the Universe was big enough to have an immense Schwartzschild Radius whose event horizon wasn't easily obvious.
SchwartzschildRadius derives from mass, but the BlackHole is still only a dot in spacetime. A point with essentially no radius, no dimension. Oh, was there just a magic word? BlackHoles are actually forbidden by quantum physics. Neutronstars are already good for eggheads headaches. Merge two and the damn thing decreases its size dramatically. Not enough that, it eats everything that gets near. Into a point .... 🚀🏴☠️
Exactly, it would be a very unlikely coincidence if we were exactly in the center of that "observable universe blackhole". But were are - by definition - in the center of the observable universe. Why and how could the density drop to zero if we move. It isn't necessary for a black hole that the density outside of it is zero either - rather it is oftentimes the opposite.
Been saying for maaany years black holes are big servers, makin universes out of the information extracted from the things they eat. Kinda fun to see that something similar actually is being looked into nowdays 😂
When I was a little kid I was extremely fascinated with black holes. Then in high-school I suggested to my friend what if the universe rinse-repeats itself by every black hole consuming one another and a big bang is made from 1 black hole that contains everything
@@IncriminatedAntelope yeah but if u look at it like: it tears everything down to its basic information then like a computer that information is used to creates something like a simulation universe in there it can still add up 😂 dont ask me how it could do that, but i like to think that we're like small programs floating in the information soup and reading the information into something visible hahaha
The theory of gravity, General relativity, has equations that can be transformed in equations where space remains constant and the propagation speed of light is described in a tensor. Since both describe the same reality we can use conclusions in one view use in the other view. We have the observation of radar pulses that bounce of Venus and their measured travel time. This travel time is longer than is expected with a constant speed of light if the path of the radar pulses comes near to the sun. The delay we observe is called Shapiro delay. Standard GR explains this with curved spacetime. But if we assume space to be constant, then we have to explain this same observation with that the propagation speed of light is less near a mass. Extending this to Black Holes we get that at the Event Horizon of the BH the delay goes to infinity. In other words, the propagation speed of light goes to zero. But since all matter can only move with a speed less than the speed of light we get that all matter and all particle wave functions come to a halt. Conclusion: If we would be inside a BH, then all matter and all light would stand still. Since this is not the case it is impossible that we are inside a BH. The density of every BH of every Radius is such that matter can't exist inside because no particle wave can propagate.
Mind blowing concept! I feel that we will never truly know if we are inside a black hole or not. It's not like we could travel to the edge of the universe to find out. Scientist truly have the ultimate job speculating all this. There's no way to prove most of their theories but it's fun to ponder.
I think leaving that term as “Instant Anton” sounds best Anton. Congratulations. Its much better than a joke about getting apples out of a bucket, or someone with no arm and legs, floating in a pool -Bob
instant anton. The life changer for teachers. Pull instant Anton out of packaging, pour water on it, anton will expand and start to teach your class instantly.
What's actually crazy to me is how visualizations are so powerful that simply putting everything on a graph revealed new potential ideas in a field that's already so saturated.
You can calculate how fast the universe is going to grow by measuring how much mass is revealed as the universe expands. if more mass is revealed, that means that the universe will increase in mass and needs to grow bigger to maintain the Schwarzschild radius.
if the graph is correctly made of cource (reference to all Earth maps that aren't accurate at all)
@@greengoblin9567 What does "mass is revealed" means?
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 When time passes, the observable universe increases in size because more light is able to reach us. This means that time is proportional volume of the observable universe. This is similar to a black hole, because the roles of space and time are reversed past the event horizon. This is the same if the observable universe is a black hole.
@@greengoblin9567 "When time passes, the observable universe increases in size because more light is able to reach us."
That's right.
"This means that time is proportional volume of the observable universe."
That's wrong. Please read up on what the word "proportional" actually means.
"This is similar to a black hole, because the roles of space and time are reversed past the event horizon. "
Yes, the roles of space and time are reversed. So what?! In what way does this make it similar to the expansion of the universe???
"This is the same if the observable universe is a black hole."
Not at all!!! Actually, it's totally different, not "the same"!
Instanton is the word thats used to explain how fast Anton creates these videos everyday
I thought it was pronounced inst-Anton.
Instantontoninstanton
I think it's certain that "the answers" to all our unanswered questions about what and how the universe *is* will turn out to be far, far weirder than we ever anticipated, or can even imagine.
Agreed.
The answer is 42.
... being fed bs ... indeed. 😆
I think it will be so simple & straightforward it will be a "smacks forehead - aha" moment
Then how will we even know?
Science aside, I love that one of the authors of the study is named Lineweaver. It's perfect, like something out of a DnD campaign or a novel
He totally weaved the lines on the graph
If I had a name like that, I would make sure my career was related to lines in some way lol
He's an amazing person to talk to. I'm sure he'd be a pain to run a D&D game for cause he'd bust all the DM's plans. :)
Like Chase CEO JP “Diamond”
(Money 🦀)
Or Donald “Trump”
(Wins, even in Politics)
Elon “Musk”
(the smell after not showering in exchange for innovation) ok this one is a joke but there is definitely a study out there that attributes success to given/family names
@@mvflp2218 Totally lol. My married name is a kind of water spinach 🤣 I wonder where that will get me in life? I do love vegetables...
If we are inside a black hole, does the coming heat death of the universe mean that our binding energy will someday escape as Hawking radiation?
Wow that question really got me thinking....
Perhaps. Who the heck knows.
Depends on the laws of the physic of the universe in which the black hole is.
The binding energy will be converted into rain, probably chocolate flavored.
Quick! Calculate the expected energy loss through hawking radiation of a black hole the size and mass of the universe with the observed and expected loss of energy of our universe
Noble prize is yours my friend
I love how this person put together this graph. It's something I've day dreamed about a ton. The very small & the very large & where our limits are. They theorized perfectly about the realms that are beyond our reach. Huge props to who ever made this graph. It's a great mental model
Seriously, this paper is bunk. They put the hubble radius on the graph like a physical object; it's not. Even when referring to the entire universe; it doesn't belong on the graph, the universe IS the graph.
@@kenengel620 My beef too with the video, I can understand it if they added it for reference while plotting "sizes", but materializing the observable universe as an object with distinct property feels like a stretch.
Brother, your videos, in their way, have helped me through a lot of years. Thank you. Please never stop being the wonderful person you are.
Anton, as much as you can explain these things to a dumb guy like myself, I’m still blown away from the massive information of the universe. Great vids!
just a little downplay: he’s just reading articles and this task not even quick cause when I was invested and had enough time, I observed that I was up front and he posted things i was reading weeks ago. I want to say that he is not superhuman and knows this all to present it to us, it’s “just” a news show.
@@realmcafeeSo where are your videos? Not sure what your flex is. You used to read articles when you had more time? Congratulations, Mr. Smartypants.
@@johnn.2017 wtf. i could flew btw, but my intention was to explain that anton is not smarter than us and that tyy7760 could be like him, if he finds the time to create videos.
@@realmcafee Sorry, the encouraging part of your comment was not clear. I'm guessing that English is not your first language (which to me means you're smarter than me; I only speak one) so I apologize that I did not understand your intention. Have a great day, beautiful person!
@@johnn.2017 communication is about sending and receiving. i guess i have to "send" better to not be misunderstood. wish you good.
Hope we will learn more about the “instant Anton” in future videos!
nice one! thanks for the laugh
Instant Anton. Just pour water and grow your very own wonderful person.
@somescientist3821,
Braintrap! Watch out, Black Holes are tricky. If we are inside a BlackHole, the accretiondisk is non existent for us. That is outside. Disprooves another assumption from the video, about the density outside. 🚀🏴☠️
@@busybillyb33
😂👍🏻
Next April Fool's Day, he should temporarily rename his channel "Instant Anton."
yeah i noticed this a few years back that the density of the universe is very close to the critical density you would need to make a black whole of the size of the entire universe.
So if we live in a black hole... does that mean each black hole in our universe contains a universe themselves? Maybe all of reality is just an infinite series of black holes? We live in a bag of infinite holding.
Look up lee smolin and cosmic natural selection. It indeed proposes that every black hole creates another universe with slightly different laws and overtime (hence natural selection), universes tuned to creating the most black holes will become dominant, what’s more is we happen to live in one such universe which is very nicely tuned for creating black holes.
A bag of infinite other bags. Maybe each one with different rules and existance.
No. The matter/energy of this universe will all exit through black holes that converge into the singularity that will spawn the next universe.
@@sprightlyrandom1550I disagree. I think all black holes lead to the same next universe...the singularity that spawns it anyway.
It would certainly explain where my missing socks go when the wife does the laundry. If we add up all the socks that go missing in the laundry, that mass must be somewhere. There's no black hole close enough to explain the phenomenon, but if we're already inside a black hole, that makes perfect sense.
Anton every time I listen to you I am mind boggled. you are able to explain in simple language the most complex of subjects - I think you are wonderful. God Bless You - you are the smartest person on the internet.
Another bot comment
@@DolphLundgrensDolphinDungeon Anton uses bots?
@@thrwwccnt5845 could be anyone
Child me feels a lot of validation now. Been thinking this for almost 30 years ever since I started to get into Hawking’s works.
Did you also see where they made wrong assumptions? BlackHoles are tricky! But they solve a lot of cosmologic confusion, if thought thru to an end .... 🚀🏴☠️
Did you miss where he said we don’t live in a black hole
He did not say that. He said its unlikely because no one knows why the external Universe should be empty. I have an explanation for that and it makes absolutely sense that it is empty. Because everyone misses the Time dialation. And the fact, that from our perspective of the time dialation "we" or our Blackhole would have swallowed everything in existance that it coukd have ever collided with literally in all eternity of time of the mother universe in one splitsecond in our time perspective. Everyone who does not understands this just misses the time dialation.
@@diefirmenwandler8667 he said we should assume we’re not living in a black hole..Word for word. And the problem is with density, not time dilation or as you’re putting it “the time dialation.” Its dilation. And there’s no “the time dilation.” It’s just time dilation. No one is missing time dilation at all, that’s a difference found in general relativity. It has nothing to do with making or explaining zero density. I’m not trying to be rude but the way you’re speaking about it makes no sense whatsoever for this topic. You wouldn’t apply time dilation as a difference for what the black hole is swallowing elsewhere and us when the issue is that there’s no zero density according to our math and to try to force there to be would contradict mountains of established physics
12:14
wow, this way of putting things together is one of the most exciting things Anton so far has brought to us!
it also makes him really deserve the title "Instant Anton" !
This aligns with my assumptions about universes and black holes!
This is an amazing paper you’re detailing. This definitely is in line with what Neil Turok is saying. Watch his recent PI public presentation. Universe is simpler that we expect it to be. Thank again for your hard work in sharing this with everyone!!!!!!!🎉
InstAnton was first introduced to me by our rock star Anton!!!!
Thanks, Anton, for the InstAnton reference! I'm now on my way to an entirely new area of study!!!☮ We love you and keep on doing what you do.😀
My favourite part of your videos is your greeting: Hello, wonderful person! Thank you! You make my day, every day!
Thanks for creating the universe Anton! I’d been wondering why the days were getting darker recently and thought it might be that winter but it must be due to the black hole we’re living in instead.
Congrats to who made this graph is so simple, since it points out something that's intriguing just by laying out what we know. 😆 love your videos Anton, my mind is buzzing with ideas and intrigue! 👍👍
"Hello wonderful Quantumobjects"
instAnton - around 14 billion years ago
it's always good to introduce varying perspectives to make one think
thanks for the information anton
So the answer to the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is ......
*"instant Anton!!"*
I had gotten spooked when I saw this graph a few days back. Glad you could explain it so brilliant. I think a three dimensional graph of the same would stirr things a bit 🎉
and what's the third axis then?
@@cobaliusI’d add temperature 😅
The rule that an object forms a black hole when it fits inside its Schwarzschild radius only applies to static objects. The universe is expanding so it escapes this condition. However, white hole models of the big bang universe are possible if we are prepared to give up homogeneity outside the observable universe limit, and why wouldn't we be?
If somehow homogeneity breaks outside of OUR observable universe (why? are we SOOOO special?) it makes no fuckin mathematical sense that inside of any even remotely resembling black hole would be homogeneous. It pains to even here such thoughts, honestly, as Swarzshield black hole for which that radius is coincidentally similar to radius of observable universe at exactly THIS POINT IN TIME is nothing like the universe we observe. Applying Sw radius to the universe is like saying that water has consciousness because it's roughly the same density as human.
As a scientifically-literate layman, white-hole models of the Big Bang are my favourite area of speculation in cosmology. I can't explain why, but it just seems like such an aesthetically pleasing concept. I'm prepared to throw the idea away if evidence mounts against it, but until then, I'm rooting for it!
@@avelkm Humans are conscious in that they try to obey the laws of morality. Animals are conscious in that obey the laws of nature/instinct. Particles are conscious in that they obey the laws of physics by how they were designed/their observable properties. It's not a stretch when you take it down these steps. Humans came out of this universe. I think panpsychism is the most valid theory of consciousness we have at the moment. I think consciousness is best defined as what level of awareness you are at. It takes a bunch of conscious particles to ultimately create a conscious being. I don't think the cells in your body know they have created a human being, and it is certainly true these things are more aware than a rock. Eventually these multiple levels of awareness compound and stack on top of each other until we reach our level of awareness.
Please leave conspiracy stuff to dedicated feeds.
@@avelkm If you want to understand cosmology beyond the pop-sci level I suggest you start by studying the Lemaitre-Tolman model.
Thanks!
God said, "Instant Anton.", and Creation replied, "Hello wonderful person!"
The double forbidden triangle has GOT to be where the devs hid their toolkit
I do think it’s an interesting concept. The fact that the farthest galaxies are moving faster away from us always made my peasant brain suspect they’re just falling closer and closer into a black hole than we are
Finally, someone else is thinking along my idea of how we exist.
We have to be inside a black hole in order of matter to exist, as energy needs to be traveling near the speed of light in order to become matter.
I've long wondered whether we experience the "arrow of time" because we are inside a black hole and are bound to always head towards the singularity.
Time dilation in this context is simply the observable effect of speeding up sufficiently to ever so slightly divert our future light cone away from that singularity, thereby slowing our fall towards it (keeping in mind that time and space are swapped inside a blank hole).
I'm no scientist though and these are just my own rambling thoughts. 😊
All in all we’re just perceiving a cosmic process. Time in one direction. The fact that other intelligent beings perceive time differently doesn’t seem far off. Just not the reality of our specific condition. Just endless possibilities.
That's interesting. Of course, the Third Law states that entropy in general always increases. The truth may lie in the fact that we need to move towards entropy to be able to act against it, to create order. But, if total order was the final "end state", then the universe would be entirely uniform and immovable - thus a "singularity".
So, perhaps the other black holes we perceive (or rather "assume") are actually reverse running universes that we cannot reach because their "arrow of time" is the opposite of ours, and we are perceived as a simple black hole as seen from those universes.
I always viewed the "arrow of time" of physical time as unavoidably pointing towards the heat death of the universe due to the unavoidable inevitability of total entropy of the universe's _closed system_ , that its "accelerating expansion" nature is inevitably leading us towards.
(Eng is my 2nd language, so pardon me if that sentence doesn't make any sense.)
I wonder if anyone has ever compared these two ideas (yours and mine), and come up with a probability comparition.
Even this video ties into the argument that I present: It explains whether the universe is a closed system (i.e. it has a boundary) or an open system (i.e. no boundary -> we live inside a black hole.
Turns out, there is a boundary to the extire universe, which leads to...
The universe is a closed system
It is unavoidably moving towards an entropic heat death
This makes the arrow of time itself unavoidable
i.e. _physical_ time always marches forward.
Related: So, going back in time should not be possible. Hence, *reality* won't ever have to confront many of the time-travel paradoxes that such time-travel would cause.
But, that doesn't take away from the fact that considering these praradoxes is still fun, and they sometimes lead to cool sci-fi stories.
If a black hole is inside a black hole do space/time swap back to normal in the inner black hole or do they get twisted even further? 😅
8:20 Instant Anton!
👍🏻😁👍🏻
Double forbidden physics, just fantastic!
I started to wonder about 15 years ago if the Big bang was a bit like the creation of black hole from the inside or a white hole. And the more I've read about the holographic Universe and Leonard Susskind work, the more is starts to make sense.
And when you realize that each black hole in our Universe might become a universe, it makes the head spin.
It reminds me of a video game I’ve played called Destiny. The awoken lived within a pocket universe inside a black hole. I’ll give you lore excerpt for understanding.
_---"We have detected a pattern that was imprinted into our universe by its ancestor: a fingerprint of the initial conditions into which existence was born. From this information, we have confirmed the most primordial of Awoken myths. Our universe is a subset of another. We live within a singularity, a knot in space-time, that orbits a star in another world._
_"Conventional relativity would suggest that time outside an event horizon passes quickly compared to a clock within, but our universe has a peculiar relationship with its mother. Thousands of years have passed for us on the Distributary. Outside? Centuries, at most. We are a swift eddy in a slow river._
Space is a "fabric" eventually its bound to tear. All that mass finally rips the fabric, boom big bang on the other end
Did you miss the argument in the video (and the paper) showing that we do _not_ live inside a Black Hole?
@@joshlewis575 So you didn't understand that calling space a "fabric" is just a metaphor?
Doesn't our Big Bang model sound alot like a large scale anti matter reaction?
What if the two are connected somehow? A volume of space filled with antimatter suddenly has matter introduced and a huge "explosion" and chain reactions occur ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What a brilliant thing to do -- to get a really big picture including everything we know.
I love integrating all these disparate parts and concepts into one graph -- but I never would have had a clue what the graph meant.
Thanks, Anton, for using your great gift of teaching to help me comprehend so much more every day.
You are like an " Inst-Anton" for the universe of my scientific mind ...
The opposite side of the graph is an anti-universe, where basically everything is inverted. The negative density, or zero density, would be maximum density of antimatter and zero density of matter. So even time could be negative, meaning the opposite of our sense of time, where entropy increases indefinitely, this negative would be similar to watch time in reverse where entropy “decreases” in relation to our sense of time. Well, that’s my interpretation.
People think way to much in jing and jang.. i mean, darkness, whats it really? Its the absence of light, and not its own thing. Coldness, its not its own thing to, its the absense of heath.. i dont think a “shadow realm” like you suggest exist. There could be one, but it wont be a plain inverted copy of our universe atleast.. a lots of negatives dont really exist but ate just defined by human to make our realm make more sense.. another one, what is silence? Its not an anti sound, its just no sound..
@@ClosestNearUtopiayou have a point but so do they; both matter and antimatter exists and act as two sides of the same thing. The absence of antimatter in the Universe, and thus the opposites being imbalanced, could be explained by their hypothesis. However, as you say, other non-physical properties like entropy and time being inverted is questionable, especially since antimatter functions exactly the same as matter with regards to the laws of the Universe.
@@kingdmind yes its true some things do have a negative if itself. But are they really the inverse of what we think it is? I mean If i will play a song, and will play the same song with the phase inverted, it will cancel each other out and the sound will be gone. Just like how we make active noise canceling. So we cancelled out noise with noise, and not noise being canselled out with anti noise we cant perceive, by listening to the tracks separately there is also no way to tell if a sound is a invert of itsself since it already consited out or a wave. Just like how we mix sinuses its is possible to cancel things out with more of it.
You should read "A Clash of Cymbals" the last of the "Cities in Flight" series by James Blish, in which he posits something very like this, with an anti-universe that's approaching our own an will shortly intersect with it.
@@davidandrews2972 so what if, what if our counter galaxy will meet, will that mean we end up in a paradox not existing and or even be erased from time, will we crystalise? Whats going tho happen!!
"... instant Anton ..."!!!! Your videos are always interesting, (relatively) easy to understand. Keep it up!
We are so fortunate to be living in a golden age of scientific discovery, and to have charismatic personalities to translate the technical into the digestible. Cheers Anton!
no kidding! and Anton makes it so accessible for us all, it's amazing.
We must be in a black hole. There is some spin and charge to make things a little more tricky, but basically, any point in space is a black hole at some point, because r
12:14
Instanton: Anton instance, worldwide known to be both unique and wonderful.
I subbed because of that smile. You have great energy. Thank you so much.
If we live in a black hole, therefore in a confined space, this wouldn't explain dark matter? Think for a minute, we know that massive objects distort space itself, therefore the space itself has some type of fluid characteristic, like when you put a object in a container with water, and you move the container, the object will have resistence against the fluid, why not the objects in the observable universe behave the same way?
If space is a fluid it would be something far exceeding a superfluid, and so it woulsnt care about friction or resistance.
Dark energy could be the evaporation of our hypothetical black hole universe. The universe is losing energy and getting colder. And this is the effect dark energy has on the energy density of our observable universe.
What are you getting at is unclear.
No gas in space to push. No flying or swimming. Fluid dynamics goes out the window when there is only radiation and virtual particles. Virtual particles are "real" particles that come into existence long enough to interact with its anti particle. They quickly destroy each other. This is the premise of hawking radiation.
I'll try. If BigBang is a BlackHole, just only observed from the opposit end, it would show dark forces as fairy tales, what they truely are.
Thats about as far as anybody can get out of yout writing.🚀🏴☠️
You are on the right track. Space can’t be in the same space at the same time. That is to say, planckspace cannot superimpose itself on another’s instance of planckspace. This means that space itself behaves like a particle. Wrap your head around space as a particle and everything will start making sense.
What a fascinating topic. Very intriguing! Love ya, Anton!
8:41 All praise Anton creator of the Universe.
thanks for highlighting this. it is an ingenious presentation, which will surely lead to lots of insights.
Of all your videos I've seen, this has to be in my top 5 favorites! Great topic, thanks for covering it 😀
8:41 It's about damn space-time, we named something after Anton!
2:24 I had the opportunity to listen to Prof Charles's lectures on astrobiology during my post-grad. Truly an amazing person and a passionate researcher!
I’ve always had that theory we are the creation of another universe black hole or singularity!
Theory means that you've done the math, and your model fits all known data, no matter how diverse.
@@_John_PThe William Hypothesis
same
@simontmn Don't make fun of the creator, the great Buckman of all Buckmans.
same! and I also have the munchies
So light can’t escape a black hole but trillions of stars can live inside of one? Matter that gets to close to a black hole gets spaghettfided and pulled in but trillions of planets and stars can live inside of one? This is wild and I’m here for it.. awesome content!
It gets even wilder. But first, that decreasing density of increased BlackHole is a huge 💩.
We see only the shadow of BH. The actial BlackHoles are a dot in spacetime. A point without radius or without dimension.🚀🏴☠️
Maybe we live in another universes hypothetical universe in a black hole.
This. It could be endless, made a posit via comment a few videos back about this: an endless loop from one point to the other, universes within each black hole within each universe.
How insane would it be if it were true 🤔
@@TrayTerrawell physics likes fractals
Infinite regress.
its turtles all the way down
@user-qd3fm8te8oBlack holes are not theoretical objects.
Great Video *-SCATTERED PHOTON-* , keep up the good work!
Is it possible for a black hole to get so big that it just suddenly dissolves because it's density does not allow it to retain its nature of being a black hole?
That's basically the end result of Hawking Radiation, no? The Universe just hasn't existed for long enough for any naturally formed Black Hole to dissipate this way.
Iirc, plenty of man-made black holes have destroyed themselves thanks to this phenomenon. This was the source of the backlash regarding the large hadron collider when it first started running, because its collisions create miniature black holes, and we didn't have conclusive proof yet that they wouldn't escape containment and consume the planet.
Naked singularity is a theory that you will probably find interesting.
According to General Relativity theory - no, it would still remain a black hole with a horizon and all its other props.
@@thedeemon Thank you for the answer, while watching the video the idea of a black hole growing so big and losing it's density enough to not be a black hole anymore would probably result in a really big bang. Next question, how fast would the universal expansion rate need to be to tear apart a black hole?
@@MasterElements Remember that black holes, as they are described in GR, are vacuum solutions of Einstein equation: all their mass is concentrated at the singularity (point or ring), and the rest of the volume is empty space. That's what allows them to have formally low density - you divide the mass in singularity by the volume of empty space around, limited by the horizon. So this low density doesn't mean the black hole is weak or smth. So, even if there is strong space expansion factor, since BH's mass is still concentrated at singularity, nothing can make it unwrap or tear apart.
thanks for this. glad you’re feeling better. hair looks good, too
(inst)Anton created the universe, and now he's here to explain it to us! 🎉
InstAnton... Very appropriate! I also find it interesting that the creation myth of the tribes in Bukidnon province, Northern Mindanao, Philippines says that creation happened in a very small place called the "Banting". My wife is a Higaonon tribeswoman from Bukidnon. Of course, within the Banting was Diwata Magbabaya, the Creator, and two other beings. Magbabaya had the thought that created the universe, while one of the other beings had the matter, and the other held up the Banting. I find it interesting that the concepts of cosmology are quite similar to this.
- There is a lot to my comment, I hope you read it. I think I have an idea for what see as space might actually be and I would like to think anyone always existed.
I think if to somehow safely fall into a black hole space just shrinks and maybe any atom not quite nearby could see such as being made up of stuff like galaxies and stars and what ever basically. Like why space are dark and suffocating are because are extremely close to an area of a black hole.
Maybe like the so called "Ho'oleilana" structure which are basically maybe this area of space which are made up of many galaxies that maybe form the shape of a sphere and I guess the "bootes void" which are this empty area of space that are perhaps in the very center. So maybe what are seeing are actually an atom.
There are maybe people on the internet talking about Ho'oleilana to do with so called "big bang theory" of it being a I guess a 'reverberation' of this big bang, however I am certain it is just an atom.
This Ho'oleilana area basically from what I've seen I guess are just next to where the milky way are located in the so called "Laniakea" supercluster, which are kind of similar to Ho'oleilana being made up of many galaxies. However, Laniakea are maybe not as this big spherical shape like Ho'oleilana. I think how to describe what Laniakea looks like are maybe like the shape of chaotic electricity.
Maybe even technically Laniakea really are electricity for that matter..
Can probably look this stuff up on google to see what I'm talking about. Like a reference image.
So on that regards, I think maybe if to somehow zoom into someone's brain, into someone moving down a neuron as electricity then perhaps would see that person appear as a literal black hole.
Maybe to explain 'gravity' / energy are the act of a person 'knowing' / thinking into their existence.
And so, how a person moving down a neuron as electricity for a moment and then maybe once reach the very end of the neuron are converted into a chemical called a 'neural transmitter' and sent out of the neuron. The person are now maybe having been formed into an atom of this neural transmitter. The person just floating around in the brain as a neural transmitter, maybe extremely close to a receiver end of another neuron. If the person enters into the receiver end of a neuron then maybe would be converted back into electricity, now moving down the neuron had just entered.
So in that regards technically any brain are perhaps where a person live, like a person that live as a human or a chicken or a cow or pig or monkey or mouse for example.
How the concept of a brain work logically are 'neural networking that learn off of self', which basically mean a person able to think their own thoughts. The person are not a mindless gear in a big machine, the person just live their very own perspective, unlike anyone else. The brain, to try to describe it as basically just a house, which any person can inhabit. Maybe just by pure chance someone end up taking that house for theirself. Maybe technically someone could take over someone else's brain for that matter, maybe like if someone hooks their brain up to someone else's brain, who ever thinks the most takes the other's brain and now live in both brains.. Maybe someone with a bigger brain can more easily take over someone with a smaller brain for example, maybe it depends on how much neurons someone controls.
Maybe if someone had their brain taken away from someone else like previously having both brains connected together then perhaps the person escape as heat or also are pushed aside as some biological material in the body somewhere.
Maybe what 'death' really is, is literally just falling apart. No entering any afterlife or changing being or something like that, no disappearing forever - literally just falling apart, that's it, yet still technically there. Therefore, technically could potentially be brought back alive again. Maybe someone use technology to save someone that had fallen apart, excavating them out of the ground and put them into a new brain with new body to live again. Or maybe alternatively the person that had fallen apart, say maybe had broken down into the ground, by pure chance say were soaked up into a blueberry plant into a blueberry and say someone else who live as a crow bird eat them up and are now processed by the other persons crow body and turned into a small brain as a baby crow in an egg and maybe eventually hatching out of the egg and living as a crow.
If someone are brought back alive some way, maybe they could potentially end up forgetting their past memories maybe due to being distracted by an alien environment with nothing recognizable the person might have seen back then. And maybe if have a small brain and instinct could make it easier to be distracted from any past memory as well.
And so, should bring anyone back into a big enough brain and ideal body immediately. Maybe a way to prevent the person from forgetting their memories and turning into a blank slate could be to try to help them remember their past memory by showing an object that person might have seen back then. Ie maybe someone seen the great pyramid of Giza back then, maybe as soon as it was being built and maybe completed, maybe by seeing it now can help them remember who used to be back then.
- I think probably the great pyramid of Giza was not intended for that purpose and just only meant as a burial for this person called Khufu originally.
Another idea could be to use technology to look up their past memories and show their memories maybe directly into their vision like a VR headset but directly into their brain, or maybe also on an external display screen for example if were seeing stuff with eyes. So maybe that can be another way to potentially help someone remember who used to be back then.
Maybe what see as a 'rock' being made up of many atoms are actually many people's very existences clumped up to form that rock.
Maybe a huge lightning bolt are literally a persons very existence moving down into the ground.
Lastly, in regards to 'death', should definitely sign up to get frozen at some facility if to die with potential possibility to be rescued and brought back alive again in the future via advanced technology. Like there is this place called 'Alcor' which can either get just brain preserved for 80k$ or 200k$ for entire body. Alcor might be one of the better options since at that place might be using at least a more advanced preservation technique like injecting a special fluid into the brain and maybe also body vs some another facility with just freezing. The special fluid I think prevent like brain neurons from breaking down vs just freezing.
However being preserved when die like with just being frozen are perhaps better than nothing. If not preserved kept in place then could potentially end up suffering due to falling apart and seeping into the ground and being exposed to the outside weather and potentially coming back say as a small animal or wherever environment do not remember - and being distracted from past memories.
I think I have heard of another facility called 'Cryonics Institute' which might be cheaper since that maybe are just freezing.
In all honesty, anyone should be preserved freely at such a preservation facility like Alcor. Infrastructure like that needs to be mass produced. Maybe could send any dead person to a vault in Antarctica that can fit many people and be easily extendable - or maybe off planet underground and safe on the Moon for example.
I hope read all of it in order to make sense potentially.
Should be careful so as to not suck all the air out of someone and give each other some space while also must never leave anyone behind.
If someone really up to no good - like not ethical, should ideally stop that person without harming that person. If have the 'bring back alive again technology', still must never want anyone to get harmed. See someone else as living just like you.
- Maybe someone wants to harm others, ideally can just talk the person out of it or maybe can grab and then communicate to the person. Or maybe use a net or 'bolas' launcher like thing with rope and weight on either end; said device should launch a soft yet strong thing to capture them, ensure soft to ensure do not cause harm. Maybe net or bolas are sticky to grab onto someone more easily as well. Or maybe use a special launcher device that can launch tons of rubber sphere's in quick succession; like a water balloon filled with contact adhesive to literally glue onto the person to stop the person from being able to move their body - do that while also avoiding suffocating the person.
- Maybe instead of using a drone to drop a bomb onto someone, drop a rubber sphere filled with contact adhesive, maybe many drones all after a single person for example.
- Maybe if in a chaotic situation with weapons shooting all over the place maybe after having harmlessly captured someone to use an excavator with claw on it that had been rigged up to be remote controlled to drive over to the captured person and remotely and carefully pick up the person. Excavator claw should also ensure be soft as well so as to not cause harm.
-- In a chaotic weapons all over the place situation should also only use a weapon against someone else's weapon while avoiding causing harm.
Don't just lock someone up and forget about them, need to communicate for as long as it takes to convey ethics to just live around and not harm each other, by not harming them. Maybe eventually can get through and someone change from being in the wrong.
So, that is what I needed to say.
Should figure out at least an idea about how maybe what ever really works..
Maybe anyone really always existed and never had a beginning nor ever end.
I need to repeat, must never leave anyone behind. Maybe not alone.
How much energy would it take if you concentrated it in one place before you make matter appear according to E=mc^2? And what would happen if you concentrated that energy at the centre of a black hole and a piece of matter came into existence? Would the black hole turn inside out?
I think according to this graph, the Instanton's mass might be the number you're after. But it's mass/energy and density together that allow the two to interchange.
More accurately you could ask: What's the smallest possible amount of energy I could condense into a very small point and end up with massive particles?
Oh my sweet child... (no). You can have an answer for that. Open Wikipedia and look for mass of any "matter" particle. They are expressed in eV (MeV for protons and neutrons) which are ... units of energy!!! We create matter from energy all the time in particle accelerators, it's what they are built for. And it's not a lot at all.
kind of answered your own question there! how much matter do you want? 90 million billion joules will get you a kilo according to e=mc^2. if you only wanted a breadcrumb, say then 90 gigajoules should get you a decent one. of course, density and avagadro, binding energy of a nucleon etc. are going to complicate things somewhat and atoms are famously empty so you would have to distribute the energy fairly unequally over the expected volume of your wanted material.... yeah. not as easy as i thought it'd be.... anyway, 90 jiggajoules is the energy content of 750 gallons of gasoline. if you could burn all that within the space of a breadcrumb then you'd get a toasty, tasty result! :)
Deep and fascinating episode, thanks, Anton!!
I think a simpler way to marry quantum physics and classical mechanics is to try to create particles out of nothing but gravity and light. I think the key reason particles exist is because it isn't possible to hit a singularity. Anything that would move toward a singularity would miss it. If that thing is attracted to the singularity somehow, it would necessarily orbit it. The orbit could be infinitely tiny but it would never be able to hit it. The movement would never end. I think fundamental particles are light orbiting infinitesimally tiny singularities.
Infinite focus on a time variation approaching zero… mix this limit (which is the definition of derivate) with Laplace Transform, but in frequency domain
that would be an interesting idea, but singularities that small would dissipate away thanks to hawking radiation, by way of the singularities pulling apart the spontaneously generating particle-anti particle pairs
Unless they're not gravitational singularities, I guess
@@Gogglesofkrome Or if they are naked singularities.
"Ultimate Graph of the Universe Shows" sounds downright bureaucratically Vogoun.
Thanks for the video, Anton!
I just learnt that Anton is the building blocks for the answer to everything 😂
Wonderful video with wonderful insights!
An expanding universe implies a point of origin. Should it be assumed that since the observer is always the center of the observable universe that there is no point of origin beyond the observer?
Well, the observer isn't the center. That seems unlikely. Why would it be.
@Happy_Broom: "An expanding universe implies a point of origin."
No, it doesn't. Why do you think so?
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 if it's expanding, it started somewhere, no?
@@father3dollarbill The expansion started everywhere at once, not at one single point.
I sometimes experience "instant Anton", whenever anton uploads and I get a notification and instantly tap on it!
If the universe existed inside a black hole, could that explain why it's expanding?
In all likelihood it isn't expanding. The theories on the expanding universe have struggled a lot to stay afloat in light of younger galaxies exhibiting the same observable effects as the older galaxies in many cases. That said, it's possible everything is getting smaller, which creates the effect of things moving away from us/shrinking. If you were standing a few feet away from me and started shrinking to the size of an ant, it's easy to say you're shrinking, but if you're a quarter mile away and I can't even tell what direction you're facing, it looks like you're moving away from me. If the James Webb telescope has discovered anything, it's that we had barely a clue as to how far things actually are. At this point it's looking like the speed of light isn't so much a factor in our ability to see out into the universe as our ability to see things relative to other things to gauge their real distance.
No, if, we did not expanding, Black hole is kollaps, If we started as a exploding black hole, we goin the right way. Only my thords
@@hurtighansen1what
@@grawss >That said, it's possible everything is getting smaller, which creates the effect of things moving away from us/shrinking.
I'm glad this idea is catching on, in combination with a fractal-like universe of black holes inside black holes.
Assuming that intergalactic space contains a given number of atoms per cubic meter, we can predict a consequence of math for the absorbing and scattering of photons as it passes through light years of said space. Factoring in interstellar space, we have a greater impact on said photons. This is called attenuation and it gives the impression of expansion. Go put a magnifying glass on some very small print. Inside the relative bubble of the magnifying glass, all the print is readable. Outside of the bubble everything is micro print. By moving the magnifying glass you can change the relative position of "now" and "here". In this way our galaxy appears as a fuzzy red blob from the fuzzy red blobs we are seeing with our telescope. Hope that helps you. Basically the universe is as developed there as it is here. The fuzzy red blobs are now fully formed Galaxies in the bubble of their own relativity but we can't see them as they currently exist.
Instant Anton, the start of everything. I like that.
@Anton Petrov
Please read this:
I have a somewhat broken time perception which makes me able to percieve time kind of as one singular piece. I tell since more than a decade even since before I have ever heard from that believe from anyone else, that we live in a blackhole. And I also think that we see the things at the edge of the universe in realtime. Just that the time there runs infinately slow compared to ours (from the outside perspective - not from ours). And the same goes the other way around. Also the speed of light towards oneself is infinitely fast and the other way around its half the "speed of light c". Making the information speed equaling C. (There is a nice Video about it why mankind has never really measured the actual speed of light and its also not colliding with the relativity theory) And even albert Einstein said his concepts are only true if what I said is assumed to be wrong.) The attribute of this configuration causes oneself to be always the one thing in the universe that moves the fastest through time. But at the edge of the event horizon we run infinitely slow viewed from everything outside the Event horizon. Because viewed from the outside we are a singularity like a punct like entity where the time runs infinitely slow.
So what does it mean. That means that from outside perspective. The universe should have appeared in a split second at the beginning (to our timestandards (consuming the Star or whatever comparable entity accumulated the mass in the beginning.) In the center it would have formed, and then expanded as long as the "star like entity" collapsed into it. Then the time dialation kicks in. From the inside as it runs infinitely slow compared to the outside. All the time of the external universe from the outside will have passed within the fraction of a second from our inside perspective. So everything that this Blackhole will ever collide with within Quadrillions of Quadrillions of Millenia will happen in a splitsecond from our perspective until there is nothing that can further all into it. (Dropping the density outside to Zero). Because everything that could have ever been fallen into the Blackhole ever, happened in the first second of our Universe. So the density outside is zero exept all other Blackholes that had escape velocity at one point.
So our universe probably expanded ridigulously fast in the beginning filling everything then gettin filled even more but slower and then slower and slower until nothing could fall into it anymore throughout eternity and then it just expanded into the direction of time. (Once spacial or time dimensions run to infinity they flip on the axis and become the other.)
It absolutely makes sense. We live in a blackhole. And I have more arguments but if anyone has a different opinion please prove me wrong.
If we did live in a black hole it would have to be a black hole that expands faster than the speed of light.
I always wondered if black holes were just more universes since I don't see if there are any observable white holes. I had the idea that maybe all that matter is just another big bang for another universe.
That was so intriguing! I love this. Anton you are the best at what you do.
I would honestly not surprised if this were actually the case. It makes intuitive sense if you vaguely understand the concept of black holes and just how the universe functions.
Makes even more sense the more you understand. Eggheads are gonna dismiss this because it makes the dark force obsolete. 🚀🏴☠️
12:14
The universe in a blackhole would explain a lot. The big bang would just be when it condensed so much it exploded within an that explosion equalized the gravity within that's why are see able universe is expanding at light speed but doesn't look like to us so we are moving thru time and not space. And it would explain how subatomic particals appear from nothing and dissappear because it is matter being pulled in from an outside universe being smashed and sometimes being ejected out of the blackhole. I think it would be cool if most massive blackholes had a smaller universe inside them doing the same thing.
the mathmatical model of a blackhole and out universe have been very similar for decades, this isn't really new, just a new visualization of it. this makes sense also. i first saw the models in one of Stephen Hawking's books from over 20 years ago. it makes you wonder about some things.
NO IT DIDNT!!......YOO DIDNT WONDER BOUTA THING!!!😠
Thanks for everything, Anton.
Hi Anton! If it turns out we do live in a black hole, would that cause any major changes in how we view physics?
No, because physics are universal, and it will not matter if we find unknown phenonema compared to what we think are the physics. We will just build the new rules on the existing ones.
No. Though it would solve some of the biggest cosmologic problems. 🚀🏴☠️
Anyone who can say flat out no is not thinking about this question critically. Any number of insights could change the way we view physics. While sufficiently dependable, the standard model is still only theoretical. In this scenario it could be that nothing changes and we're just as ignorant as we were before learning about our black hole universe, but let's be willing to keep an open mind at least.
I'm still waiting for proof for EU!!!😂
@@YantisOm the basics of “physics” doesnt change.. how many physics we have even? Gravitational, kinetic, electron, quantum. Their al physics, and never ever changed the way we see physics. That is does change hoe we see the world is something entirely different. Physics is just a term for anything accouring in nature being described mathematically..
Also, did you really liked yourself just now!? 🤣🤦🏼🫠
@@ClosestNearUtopia Electron physics completely changed the way we viewed physics at the time of its discovery. Quantum research has done the same, physics changes as our understanding changes and our ability to express it gets more accurate.
The instaton is a wormhole that acts as an exit for only spacetime (matter is too big to transverse). There are entrance wormholes all around the universe, like at the center of many galaxies. This makes the universe a sort of Klein bottle.
I've been waiting for over a week, in hopes that Anton would cover this paper. Dreams do come true I suppose 🎉
Absolutely fascinating. Thanks Anton 😊
A question: if a blackhole is created by a super massive star collapsing, does that mean that universes are created from such thing happening? It just seems so obscure and unlikely
Thats a micromass black hole. Its therefore only a tiny universe. Assuming Bang & BlackHole are two opposit ends of same phenomenm. 🚀🏴☠️
As others have mentioned, you must also consider time dilation and the reversal of time & space inside a black hole. From the point of view inside, all of time has happened regarding all that is outside of it. Perhaps a constant recursive situation between all black hole universes.
@@NefariousKoel buddy time dilation is appropriate for describing effects around or near a black hole. Not inside a black hole. Again you people are running around acting like you understand time inside a black hole
Thanks Anton for explaining this graph. I was intrigued when I first saw it as it raises some fascinating possibilities.
What if we draw that graph 5 billions years ago when observable universe was smaller?
It honestly makes zero sense, implying that we are once again somehow special and are situated just in the center, and also somehow universe is homogeneous on a big scale and then suddenly stops. I highly doubt black holes are homogeneous inside, it doesn't make any sense. But Anton already said that it breaks all physics. Intriguing coincidence though.
It has never been smaller. It has always existed. It will always exist.
@@generator6946Yikes.
5 billion years ago it's not that the universe was smaller. It's the fact that long ago no one was observing the universe per se, and had no tools to observe as far as we can today. Currently, our biggest hurdle is getting data beyond what we can currently observe which will require better tools and advancements in technology. Even then we will still not be able to answer every question as I'm sure even more questions will arise.
That's an interesting question. I like your thinking/reasoning skills. My interpretation of your question is this:
Since the universe has been expanding (and accelerating) during the last 5 billion years but the mass has remained constant, the mass density ratio of the universe is lower today than 5 billion years ago (and is constantly going down over time as the universe continues to expand). In short, today the Hubble Radius is on the line as shown at 6:08 in the video but would not have been on the line 5 billion years ago when the universe was smaller but had the same mass (a more dense universe).
If my understanding of your thinking is correct then the answer to your question is no. Your reasoning is fine but when dealing with (natural) log scales, perspective changes extremely fast. One unit of change on the graph is an order of magnitude. Two units of change is two orders of magnitude and so on. In short, the volume of the universe could double, triple or quadruple and it would be a minor nudge on the graph.
If it helps, imagine the Empire State building (102 floors). If we represented it in natural log floors, it would only be two stories tall. The average building in the US is ten stories or less (1 natural log) while the Empire State building and all taller buildings are only 2. We would have to build a skyscraper 1,000 stories tall to make a 3 story natural log building.
I want a T-shirt with this graph on it!
In a way we are in a black hole. Because of the increasing expansion of the universe there are parts of the universe we will never 'see' and will never 'see' us because expansion is moving us apart to quickly for light to ever travel that increasing distance. This is called the Lambda horizon. However that also means every part of the universe will at some point become its own 'black hole' as it relates to distance other parts. Though I think its more of an event horizon than a singularity.
There is a cosmological event horizon, but a black hole is defined (loosely) as a compact region of spacetime hidden behind a horizon.
Brilliant! So many thanks for this Anton!
🕉It was quite funny to see how Anton just realized that he was the center of the universe and the cause of everything in his life that manifests itself from instant)🙏
Imagine when he finds out we are him and he is us, that we all exist simultaneously in infinite space time nexi, time-space nexi and ‘out’ of time and space. 😊
I really enjoy your videos. Thank you for sharing
You are a wonderful person
About 30 years ago, I was lying in bed working out the likely "Schwartzschild Radius" size to calculate whether the Universe could be a "black hole" that would not need extreme phenomena happening within our visible universe. I decided the Universe was big enough to have an immense Schwartzschild Radius whose event horizon wasn't easily obvious.
SchwartzschildRadius derives from mass, but the BlackHole is still only a dot in spacetime. A point with essentially no radius, no dimension.
Oh, was there just a magic word? BlackHoles are actually forbidden by quantum physics. Neutronstars are already good for eggheads headaches. Merge two and the damn thing decreases its size dramatically. Not enough that, it eats everything that gets near. Into a point .... 🚀🏴☠️
When we get to the edge of universe, we bring the universe with us.
Exactly, it would be a very unlikely coincidence if we were exactly in the center of that "observable universe blackhole". But were are - by definition - in the center of the observable universe. Why and how could the density drop to zero if we move. It isn't necessary for a black hole that the density outside of it is zero either - rather it is oftentimes the opposite.
Been saying for maaany years black holes are big servers, makin universes out of the information extracted from the things they eat. Kinda fun to see that something similar actually is being looked into nowdays 😂
When I was a little kid I was extremely fascinated with black holes. Then in high-school I suggested to my friend what if the universe rinse-repeats itself by every black hole consuming one another and a big bang is made from 1 black hole that contains everything
@@IncriminatedAntelope yeeeh thats kinda that im thinking too! Black holes would be a nice multiverse explanation aswell haha
@thaflowie only if they didn't tear everything entering them into nothing, then the thought would be more settling...lol
@@IncriminatedAntelope yeah but if u look at it like: it tears everything down to its basic information then like a computer that information is used to creates something like a simulation universe in there it can still add up 😂 dont ask me how it could do that, but i like to think that we're like small programs floating in the information soup and reading the information into something visible hahaha
Amazing episode! Thanks!
Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done.
My greatest happiness is the $60,000
bi-weekly profit I get consistently from my $15,000 investment despite the economic fluctuation.
Please can guide me through how you made it.
Wow, suprised
The theory of gravity, General relativity, has equations that can be transformed in equations where space remains constant and the propagation speed of light is described in a tensor. Since both describe the same reality we can use conclusions in one view use in the other view. We have the observation of radar pulses that bounce of Venus and their measured travel time. This travel time is longer than is expected with a constant speed of light if the path of the radar pulses comes near to the sun. The delay we observe is called Shapiro delay. Standard GR explains this with curved spacetime. But if we assume space to be constant, then we have to explain this same observation with that the propagation speed of light is less near a mass.
Extending this to Black Holes we get that at the Event Horizon of the BH the delay goes to infinity. In other words, the propagation speed of light goes to zero. But since all matter can only move with a speed less than the speed of light we get that all matter and all particle wave functions come to a halt.
Conclusion: If we would be inside a BH, then all matter and all light would stand still. Since this is not the case it is impossible that we are inside a BH. The density of every BH of every Radius is such that matter can't exist inside because no particle wave can propagate.
Thank you Anton for all information you give us!
If we are inside a black hole, perhaps its a 'fuzzball' and that the galactic filaments and magnetic tubes part of the strings of that fuzzball.
The universe came from instant Anton. This is how he knows to much to keep making these awesome videos.
Mind blowing concept! I feel that we will never truly know if we are inside a black hole or not. It's not like we could travel to the edge of the universe to find out. Scientist truly have the ultimate job speculating all this. There's no way to prove most of their theories but it's fun to ponder.
Intructor Anton instructing us on instanton is something I needed
The right pronunciation is definitely instant Anton.
As long as we all keep repeating it long enough
I want an Instant Anton mug! Great topic, thanks 🙏
I think leaving that term as “Instant Anton” sounds best Anton. Congratulations. Its much better than a joke about getting apples out of a bucket, or someone with no arm and legs, floating in a pool
-Bob
instant anton. The life changer for teachers. Pull instant Anton out of packaging, pour water on it, anton will expand and start to teach your class instantly.