Fred Adams - The Physics of Eternity

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 299

  • @darkages9507
    @darkages9507 ปีที่แล้ว +35

    As an international, novice undergraduate student, I took a course from Fred Adams, early 90s.
    Perfect teacher, very humble person. One of the best teachers I encountered.

    • @gj1695
      @gj1695 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      How fortunate you were! He seems as you describe.

  • @jthom6400
    @jthom6400 ปีที่แล้ว +30

    Love this channel. Some of the best existential dread topics.

    • @MagnumInnominandum
      @MagnumInnominandum ปีที่แล้ว +2

      What? Unlike the ones we made ourselves? Yeah, I suppose

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I so dread the universe's enthropic heat death (or proton degredation) that will happen billions of years after I die. So morose to think about.

    • @dongshengdi773
      @dongshengdi773 ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@tdiddle8950 don't worry, consciousness cannot die .
      This is why science is the best . Just name something that is nothing like singularity, infinity, dark energy, etc . And then claim science can explain everything 👍 and that science is fact.
      In reality, science is just all subjective interpretations of our experiences. They call it scientific consensus but we actually don't know what is fundamental reality or ultimate reality.
      .
      "The public has a distorted view of science because children are taught in school that science is a collection of firmly established truths.
      Physicist Freeman Dyson .

    • @Metso-ateco
      @Metso-ateco ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@tdiddle8950 dont worry about it. You will be long gone by the "time" that happens👍

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Metso-ateco I am eternal, dear One.

  • @purpleprinc3
    @purpleprinc3 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    "To see a World in a Grain of Sand. And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand. And Eternity in an hour." - William Blake
    Thank you for the excellent video! 🙏🙏🙏

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      That's much better said than what this dude meandered about. YOU should have been interviewed.

    • @dongshengdi773
      @dongshengdi773 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      ​@@tdiddle8950 infinity Does not compute, Therefore not practical in Real life.
      Law of cause and Effect
      implies a beginning which we know as the Big Bang.
      beyond the Big Bang are all Speculation which we call singularity .
      Like Humans created the Computer But the characters inside the Computer have No way of investigating us living outside the Computer.
      .
      Time is an illusion. Time is not Newtonian time .
      Einstein"s time is relative , therefore, everything in the universe is subjective.
      And that agrees with quantum mechanics, the Ultimate Observer based on the measurement problem.
      .
      The universe is not infinite

    • @mitseraffej5812
      @mitseraffej5812 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tdiddle8950It was William Blake that said it, and he’s well dead.

  • @LionKimbro
    @LionKimbro ปีที่แล้ว +3

    When there's nobody around, time is just a number. So whether it's 10^100 or 10^10^10^10 years, -- with nobody sitting around "waiting," it may as well just pass momentarily. The number really, really doesn't matter. At all. Until something intelligent emerges again. You can just imagine that the universes jumps from the last dying breath to the first new breath, and not really skip a beat even.

  • @TheSpeedOfC
    @TheSpeedOfC ปีที่แล้ว +25

    Fred has one of the best faces ever

    • @joshonemoore
      @joshonemoore ปีที่แล้ว +3

      The whole video I’m thinking “that is an interesting face…” not really being able to put my finger on why. Then I look down and see your comment.

    • @dongshengdi773
      @dongshengdi773 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      ​@@joshonemoore Why infinity does not exist.
      Infinity does not compute.
      Everything becomes meaningless in an infinite universe.

    • @HkFinn83
      @HkFinn83 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@dongshengdi773 in mathematics infinity is not even a complex topic. It does compute. It’s just a very discouraging idea for a human mind, and difficult to intuit.

    • @Metso-ateco
      @Metso-ateco ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@dongshengdi773 then all you have to tell us is what lies beyond that thing we call space??

    • @sailorr4287
      @sailorr4287 ปีที่แล้ว

      I don’t understand this comment.
      Tegmark, Carroll, Penrose… all have fantastic faces.
      What about Barry Loewer?

  • @robertrozier2940
    @robertrozier2940 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Best channel ever ❤

  • @neffetSnnamremmiZ
    @neffetSnnamremmiZ ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Science can empiricly only recognize determined and finite things, but not the real living entity, that is eternal!

  • @jazzunit8234
    @jazzunit8234 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Love is forever

  • @douglascutler1037
    @douglascutler1037 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Fascinating. But more a discussion of super deep time than eternity. I want to hear about what happens AFTER all the protons decay and the black holes evaporate. What happens to the laws of physics as cosmic entropy reaches a theoretical zero point?

    • @Gsp_in_NYC
      @Gsp_in_NYC ปีที่แล้ว +1

      exactly -- I love these topics on this channel, but I rarely come away with a new concept

    • @Dimitri-Jordania
      @Dimitri-Jordania ปีที่แล้ว +2

      It never ends.

    • @douglascutler1037
      @douglascutler1037 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Dimitri-Jordania I'm inclined to agree. The question I ask is how can a universe that produces infinite variation within it's own boundaries - i.e, no two snow flakes EVER the same - be itself finite?

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@douglascutler1037 All matter is finite. Doesn't matter how much variation there is, all matter is finite.

    • @douglascutler1037
      @douglascutler1037 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@rl7012 According to acclaimed British astrophysicist Brian Cox we cannot be certain where the universe begins or ends. All we can say is at some point in it's history the universe was very small, smooth, energetic, and near zero entropy. But we have no idea how it got that way. Cox does not rule out an infinite universe.

  • @Freemarkets1236
    @Freemarkets1236 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for putting this into terms a non physicist can understand and nerd out to.

  • @NothingMaster
    @NothingMaster ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Eternity is the maximum age of Being.

  • @italogiardina8183
    @italogiardina8183 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Particle physics suggests a humanistic universe of observation is a significantly finite structure but the behaviour of particles have relatively infinite probability states fated to change for a significantly long time then no time.

  • @mitrabuddhi
    @mitrabuddhi ปีที่แล้ว

    These are navomitto’s principles:
    top to down view:
    1-there is illusion. illusion is multi dimentional and made of dimentions. iluusion is all aspects of zero to infinity.
    2-there is dimention. each dimention describe a unique concept. these concepts can be anything. it can be mathematic concept like lenght or abstract concept like love or anything else. each dimension is unique in its own way but it can be seen as an interaction of infinite dimentions. dimention exists in different resolutions.
    3-there is resolution. resolution determines how many angle there is in that specific resolution of that dimention. resolution can be anything from zero to infinity. so each concept like lenght has infinite resolutions. in each resolution there is angles. resolusion 0 of all dimentions are literally the same and it is potentiality itself.
    4-there is angle. angle defines the content of that concept in that specific resolution. in resolution infinity there are infinite angles from zero to infinity. in resolution 0 there is no angle.
    5-angle 0 is illusion resolution 0. angle 1 of each resolusion is dimention resolution 1 of that concept. angle A of resolution R (R>=A) is dimention resolution A of that concept in scale 1/R.
    6-there is scale. scale mean the bigness of illusion in an angle. each angle in resolusion R has scale 1/R
    7-there is power. power is an aspect of reality that means how much quantity there is (when percieved) in an angle of each concept. power of each angle A in resolusion R is (2A-1)/2*R
    down to top view:
    1-there is resoulution 0. illusion resolution 0 is resoulution 0 of all dimentions. illusion resolution 0 is illusion itself at resolution 0. resolution 0 contain no angle.
    2-there is dimention resoulution 1. next resolution is created when one illusion is added to previous resolution. so in dimention resolution 1, one illusion is added to illusion resolution 0 in previous resolution and create one angle. each concept has its own resolution 1. combination of resolution 1 of each dimention create infinite resolution 1. each resolution 1 contain 1 angle (angle 1).
    4-there is dimention resolution infinity. dimention resolution infinity consist of the dimention resolution before infinity plus one illusion. illusion resolution infinity is the illusion itself at resolution infinity.
    5- awareness is one of illusions's dimentions. the laws of nature, each physical object or any event or each mental construct or anything unknown are embeded in their particular dimentions.
    6-illusion is the cause for each angle and and each angle is the cause for illusion.
    overall views:
    1-in topdown view reality is continues but in down to top view reality is quantized.
    2-brain by just seeing some dimentions of illusion, can identify order within the chaotic, complex and paradoxical aspects of the illusion, and create logical frameworks for understanding and interpreting and reasoning.
    3-illusion resolution infinity is a rescaled version of illusion resolution 0. if you compress resolution 1 in a way that it be to the size of an angle in resolution infinity, in this transformation resolution infinity will change to resolution 0. so resolusion 0 has the potential to be rescaled to any resolution and any dimention.
    4-all angles and no_angle exist in illusion.
    5-anti illusion is embeded in illusion.
    drmora.ir/2023/04/06/navomitto-2/
    archive.org/details/navomitto

  • @WildMessages
    @WildMessages ปีที่แล้ว +9

    I could watch this episode forever 😆

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      You will.

    • @chaivalla
      @chaivalla ปีที่แล้ว

      You are.

    • @dongshengdi773
      @dongshengdi773 ปีที่แล้ว

      Maybe space-time is not fundamental.
      Life force or consciousness could be fundamental. The mental attribute of the universe.
      .
      Breakthroughs in Biology
      Good science requires both reductionism, bottom up mechanisms, and wholism , top down organizations.
      Emotion shapes cognition .
      The mind begins the affect emotion

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@dongshengdi773 Space-time and consciousness are one in the scope of the connection between all things.

  • @nataliep6385
    @nataliep6385 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    If you love this subject - then i can highly recommend the new documentary called "A Trip To Infinity"

  • @tdiddle8950
    @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I'm a non-theist (not exactly like an atheist). I find religious certainty about its particular cosmology (and morality) to be infantile, but I also find the certainty that (what I call) the scientific community has concerning knowledge about the origins of things (like the early moments of the universe) and where things are going (especially billions upon billions of years from now) to be just a little bit beyond normal hubris.

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Concentrating upon the past and the future is, for physicists, a defense mechanism because if we're really honest, we don't yet understand the now,...and such a concept is abhorrent for scientists and scholars upon whose jobs depend on the appearance of certainty.

    • @David.C.Velasquez
      @David.C.Velasquez ปีที่แล้ว

      I'm a pan-theist, not to be confused with panpsychist, though they may be partially parallel concepts that I can't discount.

    • @HWCWTD
      @HWCWTD ปีที่แล้ว

      The main distinction is everything scientists publish or assert is subject to revision. No such allowance from the world's big 3 religions.

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@HWCWTD Have you any idea, dear one, of the wealth and the breadth of ideas within the Big Three? I'm not a religious person in any way, shape, form, or fashion, but I do understand that religion is (in a faltering sort of way) human's best attempts to understand existence beyond material reductionism. Neither science nor the Big Three has it right. As is always so, the truth is somewhere in between. Gautama Siddhartha called it "The Middle Road," (or something like that...like I said, I'm not a religious person.

  • @DrDeuteron
    @DrDeuteron ปีที่แล้ว +2

    10^100 years is 10 million universe lifetimes for every baryon in it? Not sure we can predict that far.

  • @bobtarmac1828
    @bobtarmac1828 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    COOL! More infinity.

  • @bittertruth1211
    @bittertruth1211 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Yeah! With the present partial knowledge of fundamental physics, that's what one can speculate!!

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Yeah. I suppose their job description requires them to wildly speculate and then back it up with a bunch of facts that may or may not have meaning to the idea being investigated.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@tdiddle8950 I don't think it's fair to say it's wild speculation, given that it's based on reasoned argument from known physics. It's certainly speculative, but these are calculations, not guesses.

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@simonhibbs887 What is known physics except a particular kind of belief system? History ALWAYS shows science from the past to be inadequate or perhaps even wrong. Evidence is something that a certain group comes together to mutually reinforce their belief in. Do you not think theists are firm in their beliefs and have good reasons to think the way they do? I subscribe to neither side, and so I see how they are really just two sides of the same coin.
      Scientific atheists will proclaim to the hills that there is no evidence of life after death or spirituality, but they would be wrong in this. Check out the University of Virginia Medical School Division of Perceptual Studies. They have excellent scientific proof for life after death, but hardcore atheists ignore this evidence out of hand.
      Scientists, theists, potato, potato.
      Science can put a lander on the moon, but the experience that astronauts have in outer space is more explainable with spiritual terms. Check out Noetics, which was incepted by a NASA astronaut.

  • @Snowbever
    @Snowbever ปีที่แล้ว

    What im thinking is that it is reasonable to asume that when the universe is 10^100 years old, there will be no conciousness. And the reason for that is that the universe is only about 14 billion years old as we speak. If there was conciousness at the age of 10^100, it would be very peculiar that out of all of the ages of the universe, our conciousness now happens to be so close to the left of the timeline

  • @ronleight9341
    @ronleight9341 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Eternity is awful long time, especially towards the end! - Woody Allen

  • @richblacklock
    @richblacklock ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I’d like to hear a discussion about the Electric Universe Paradigm, especially in light of the evidence JWST is providing.

    • @David.C.Velasquez
      @David.C.Velasquez ปีที่แล้ว

      It's a stretch to call a fringe hypothesis, with proponents that all come off as conspiracy theorists, a paradigm. I'm not completely dismissing your suggestion, but what evidence do you refer to?

    • @David.C.Velasquez
      @David.C.Velasquez ปีที่แล้ว

      I'd like to reply to your reply, but for some reason, youtube won't show it fully. Assuming it's concerning the apparent maturity of distant galaxies, with extreme redshifts, that should appear as younger proto-galaxies according to current models. Just in my lifetime, the official size of the universe, has been increased by an order of magnitude several times, and the age has also been increased several times... I believe this trend will continue. Is the electromagnetic force a major factor in the configuration of the universe? Obviously, but to argue a theory that considers it more influential than gravity at cosmological scales, is gonna be a tough sell without observational evidence, not anecdotal posts on flat earth forums.

  • @thejones2100
    @thejones2100 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    If anyone has not seen the channel Melodysheeps video on this subject called "timelapse of the future - a journey to the end of time".
    Please do. An absolute amazing soothing existential crisis experience.

    • @hoon_sol
      @hoon_sol ปีที่แล้ว

      Except that it's an extrapolation of Big Bang cosmology, which is some of the most moronic and religious nonsense imaginable. No point in wasting time on such stupid fictions.

    • @mitseraffej5812
      @mitseraffej5812 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@hoon_solTo date Big Bang cosmology is the best explanation of observations, however the JWST observations looks to be casting some doubt on it these days. But nothing supports the numerous supernatural creation myths that humanity in its ignorance has dreamt up over the past half a million years.

  • @wolfgangkonle2356
    @wolfgangkonle2356 ปีที่แล้ว

    How can we speculate about a time period of 10^100 years if we even do not consider the consequences of a negative energy density of gravitational fields?

  • @moman007
    @moman007 ปีที่แล้ว

    This isn’t about eternity tho. The video is talking about the universe on a time frame, beginning to end. I was hoping for a discussion on eternity/infinity

  • @t.d108
    @t.d108 ปีที่แล้ว

    😂🤣😂… am I the only one who’s reminded of the classic “Who’s on third ?” skit while listening to this conversation?

  • @daybertimagni4841
    @daybertimagni4841 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    If the universe is truly eternal then the odds of us existing at the very ‘beginning’, as we do, are impossibly unlikely. Furthermore, if it is eternal then the likelihood of Boltzmann brains and other strange phenomena jumping into and out of existence increase to an absolute certainty. In such a universe nothing can be predictable. Even our current perception of reality would be questionable.

  • @neffetSnnamremmiZ
    @neffetSnnamremmiZ ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Life can pull itself out of the nothing, so it is eternal!

    • @thomasridley8675
      @thomasridley8675 ปีที่แล้ว

      Life can only exist as long as conditions allow. The history of our own planet shows that very clearly. One day our extinction will happen. Adding us to the fossil record.

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      You are correct, Dear One. It is life, or as I call it "awareness," that is the origin of existence and not the material world that birthed consciousness (pure poppycock).

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@Thomas Ridley And how do you come by this prophetic knowledge?
      I'm big into speculation, and this world is a train wreck, but I cannot see an absolute occurrence that humans will go extint.

    • @tdiddle8950
      @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

      Humans are like cockroaches. A few of them will survive no matter what you do.

    • @thomasridley8675
      @thomasridley8675 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tdiddle8950
      Extinction isn't just something that happens to other life forms. We are just the last survivor in a long line of upright apes. All the rest are gone... extinct. What makes you think we would be immune to the same fate ?
      We exist during a relatively stable time in this planets history and it will not remain so. It's only a matter of time before our end is certain. This is a planet and universe of death not life.

  • @johnayres2303
    @johnayres2303 ปีที่แล้ว

    This is good, I hope we get more from this discussion, what happens after 10*100 years?

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      According to Roger Penrose, that's when Conformal Cyclic Cosmology becomes relevant. There's a good wikipedia page, and he discussed it on CTT.

    • @johnayres2303
      @johnayres2303 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@simonhibbs887 Yes, I’m familiar with CCC and I feel it resolves the problem with infinity and eternity. If there is a sequence of aeons and if no information passes from one aeon to the next then infinity and eternity become meaningless. An aeon may well be longer than 10^100 years but that’s a lot shorter than eternity.
      I realise Roger proposed that there could be some evidence of a previous aeon due to black holes but I would like to believe no information passes from one to the next.

  • @MrRiverGrove
    @MrRiverGrove ปีที่แล้ว +1

    So my lifetime in comparison to the potential infinite age of the universe is small, is what you're saying?

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      To be fair, it's quite small compared to known recorded human history. So really it's a matter of degrees of smallness.

  • @tac6044
    @tac6044 ปีที่แล้ว

    I'm happy to report that I did indeed get to ride my new electric scooter. It was fun.

  • @gordonquimby8907
    @gordonquimby8907 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Adams’ concluding remark at 8:16 could be paraphrased; “Compared to forever, the physical stuff of our universe is pretty short-lived.” This would suggest that the notion of an infinite progression of universes would be consistent with a God that is infinite. We don’t stop playing baseball at the conclusion of one season, we go on and have another season, and then another. Why would God stop creating after the stuff of a universe evaporates?

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      Pretty much any state of affairs can be made consistent with any conception of god. You just change the conception of god to suit.

    • @gordonquimby8907
      @gordonquimby8907 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@simonhibbs887 Maybe God fits with what we observe because God is actually God. He doesn't exist or not exist based on what we think.

    • @David.C.Velasquez
      @David.C.Velasquez ปีที่แล้ว

      @@gordonquimby8907 You're not wrong, but a better fitting conceptualization, is that god is the eternally infinite omniverse itself. As infinity can only be approached eternally, and never reached, that puts this entity we're referring to as god, outside of our material reality. There is no creator, but eternal creation.

    • @gordonquimby8907
      @gordonquimby8907 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@David.C.Velasquez I'm not going to hang my hat on there being just "eternal creation". God is not a concept of ours. None of us can fully wrap our minds around an eternal God, but that doesn't change things.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@gordonquimby8907 "He doesn't exist or not exist based on what we think." - That's certainly something we can agree on. Now, if theists could all get together and agree what god is or isn't once and for all, at east I'd have a clear idea of what it is I don't believe in ;)

  • @tdiddle8950
    @tdiddle8950 ปีที่แล้ว

    Scientists are absolutely FANTASTIC at producing data. Interpreting that data? Eh, not so much.

  • @billyrigoyourbeardedrealto1471
    @billyrigoyourbeardedrealto1471 ปีที่แล้ว

    We may not be able to quote 13.7 billions years with a straight face anymore

  • @c130comm
    @c130comm ปีที่แล้ว +1

    They have no idea

  • @micronda
    @micronda ปีที่แล้ว

    If eternity is timelessness then there is no time and therefore no space. The concepts of maths and physics would exist so long as the concept of mind exists too. Out of all of the possibilities that the mind could conceive, our universe would be one of them. The physics of eternity, would exist in many worlds. In our world, we have the concept of fields with energy, travelling as waves for about 10^100 years. To us, the waves seem real, we call them fundamental particles but they are waves and like us, just a concept of the mind.

  • @bobcabot
    @bobcabot ปีที่แล้ว +1

    im always wondering myself why do we need all these illusions? reality must be too cruel to...

  • @turkishexpress
    @turkishexpress ปีที่แล้ว

    In 10^100 years in the future, everything will disappear into a whimper...

  • @jessewallace12able
    @jessewallace12able ปีที่แล้ว

    The camera man has a tougher job following the ball in this game.

  • @danielbalboa4537
    @danielbalboa4537 ปีที่แล้ว

    Us humans will be long gone by then but something that will live forever is Love...we'll atleast according to my calculations ❤

  • @peweegangloku6428
    @peweegangloku6428 ปีที่แล้ว

    You will only get to know when, why and how everything will come to an end when you first understand when, why and how everything came into existence in the first place.

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว

      Not necessarily. Destruction is far easier than creation.

    • @peweegangloku6428
      @peweegangloku6428 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@rl7012 The discussion is about the ultimate end of everything not the random destruction of one or two things. When you speak of the ultimate end of everything, you have to address the fundamental cause(s). And that has to do with origin.

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@peweegangloku6428 The video is about eternity not the end of everything. You have made it nihilistic. And to know how something came into being does not equate to knowing how it will end. We know how babies are conceived, but how they end their lives we do not know. We just know there are a number of possibilities. Same with the universe.
      It is impossible to know for certain when, how and why the universe came into being, but we can make educated guesses. The end of the universe will come to pass, but we have no idea when or how, we can only make a range of possible theories and educated guesses.
      And the end of the universe is not the end of everything. It is just the end of everything we think we know now.

    • @peweegangloku6428
      @peweegangloku6428 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@rl7012 The video has eternity in its title but the entire discussion is not about eternity. Listen carefully to the Concluding statements in the video. I did not make the video nihilistic rather the ccontent is. For example: "Black holes are not forever..... They will eviporate in ten to the one hundred and thirty first......"
      You accuse me of nihilism and then you revert to the same. Look carefully at your comment.

  • @mcmg-museudacriacao.melind405
    @mcmg-museudacriacao.melind405 ปีที่แล้ว

    I am the first to prove that our psychic sphere reproduces the same processes as the universe, creating eternal matter, eternal and indestructible life.
    . Art, Science, Religion and Modern Physics. Holomovimento: Espelho d’Alma . La Chair de L’Univers.

  • @neffetSnnamremmiZ
    @neffetSnnamremmiZ ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The one in the end is the same who was in the beginning: the creator..

  • @consciousnessbasedcosmos
    @consciousnessbasedcosmos ปีที่แล้ว

    In statistics when we do regression analysis, it is only valid within the confine of the data we have. Obviously we don't have not a single data in the future. Therefore whatever theory you may come up with, its is really just an opinion, nothing more. In terms of value, it will be no different from those offered by theologians, philosophers, sages.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      As he pointed out, we do have data. He explained what that data is and where it comes from.

  • @katharina6865
    @katharina6865 ปีที่แล้ว

    Fortunately most of us do not know our BEFORE BIRTH, and we do not want to know our AFTER DEATH. Stay curious! Is more interesting.🤩🤩🤩

  • @kallianpublico7517
    @kallianpublico7517 ปีที่แล้ว

    Change is what characterizes consciousness. What do scientists study? Change? The fraction of change measurable by the scientific consciousness?
    If the former then speculation about the future should be accurate. If the latter then such speculation will become as moot as the civilization of Atlantis.

  • @markfischer3626
    @markfischer3626 ปีที่แล้ว

    There's only one way to find out for sure. Stick around and see what happens. 😛

  • @mickeybrumfield764
    @mickeybrumfield764 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    When there are only black holes left in the universe, it would seem that you could call it a day, and that is essentially the end of the universe.

    • @fist_bump
      @fist_bump ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Not if you are alive and able to harness energy from the black hole. Then you wait till heat death.

    • @mickeybrumfield764
      @mickeybrumfield764 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Mule
      Yes I suppose if there is Hawking Radiation going on then there is a living universe.

    • @fist_bump
      @fist_bump ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mickeybrumfield764 even without it. Theoretically you could use the black holes spin and steal some of that angular momentum. So a lack of hawking radiation only extends the effective time since the object wouldn't evaporate and only lose some of its angular momentum. No idea how long it would take to despin a black hole.

    • @mickeybrumfield764
      @mickeybrumfield764 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Mule
      Maybe you can hang around and see about doing that. Just don't let dark energy and the big rip get you.

    • @fist_bump
      @fist_bump ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mickeybrumfield764 thanks for the laugh

  • @Jaggerbush
    @Jaggerbush ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Eternity can't be ..... Or I have typed this countlessly times and will continue to type this countless times.

  • @NondescriptMammal
    @NondescriptMammal ปีที่แล้ว

    When you pretend that you can predict what will happen 10 to the hundredth power years from now with any confidence at all, you have departed far from the realm of science and entered the world of pure speculation.

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 ปีที่แล้ว

    proton decay into positron antimatter?

  • @whitefiddle
    @whitefiddle ปีที่แล้ว

    Weren't you the guys who were talking about _phlogiston_ with a straight face❓

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      That's true, scientists don't always get everything right. The point of the scientific method though is that it's a mechanism for correcting mistakes and generating, testing and verifying new ideas. I'll take that over getting stuck with the same nonsense indefinitely, with no way out of it.

    • @whitefiddle
      @whitefiddle ปีที่แล้ว

      @@simonhibbs887 You have a real talent for missing the point. We're not talking about "what you'll take". Nor are we talking about hopefully anticipated corrections in the future. We are talking about clowns and gasbags who waffle on and on about the unknowable future with the confidence that they can "say it with a straight face." Flat-earthers and astrologers do that all the time.
      This naive superstition in "the scientific method" is an exhausted wheeze. The time to "correct mistakes" is *before* making preposterous speculations.
      And speaking of phlogiston, when will they be taking embryological parallelism out of school textbooks? When will the scientific method kick in on that? 🤣

  • @chayanbosu3293
    @chayanbosu3293 ปีที่แล้ว

    Lord Krishna shows His cosmic form in the battle field of Kurukhetrya , where He showed how did our universe emarge , our existence and destruction, this is the only relegious text i.e. Mahabharata, where this whole tapestry is explained logically.

  • @jayrussell3796
    @jayrussell3796 ปีที่แล้ว

    Maybe we should worry about the next 30 years, instead of the next 1000 quadrillion...ever think of that ?

  • @jamesruscheinski8602
    @jamesruscheinski8602 ปีที่แล้ว

    what evaporates as black hole?

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      There's a decent wikipedia article on Hawking radiation that explains this.

    • @DrDeuteron
      @DrDeuteron ปีที่แล้ว

      black holes do not contain anything, they are made entirely out of spacetime, in which the mass resides. They have a very low temperature, and thus, emit blackbody radiation. Today they are much colder than the 2.7K cosmic microwave background, so are still gaining energy, but eventually......

  • @mitseraffej5812
    @mitseraffej5812 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thank goodness eternal life is a myth, imagine how boring it would become after couple of centuries.

  • @donnamarie3617
    @donnamarie3617 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    You guys with all your knowledge still don't get it. Eternity is OUTSIDE physics.
    even this is finite,

  • @dave929
    @dave929 ปีที่แล้ว

    After all matter has “gone away”, then the universe will sit empty forever. Of course, we puny ‘carbon units’ won’t be around to verify this.

  • @zerog4261
    @zerog4261 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    You would ask Data,from next generation

  • @Mixamaka
    @Mixamaka ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I know physics is the framework in which they tell the story of the universe, but sometimes it sounds like fairy tails.

    • @bobadingo
      @bobadingo ปีที่แล้ว

      Scientists and philosophers are in the same boat as religious pastors priest they all think they know what they're talking about until they get their wake up call by a dose of reality....

    • @DrDeuteron
      @DrDeuteron ปีที่แล้ว

      @@bobadingo well that is how science works, and why F does no equal MA anymore, but d/dt = -

  • @mcmg-museudacriacao.melind405
    @mcmg-museudacriacao.melind405 ปีที่แล้ว

    Este assunto já está descrito no livro e comprovado -Holomovimento : Espelho s’Alma / La Chair de L’Univers . Sorry! Sorry! Transdisciplinar subject !

  • @JonathanMarcy
    @JonathanMarcy ปีที่แล้ว

    "compared to forever they're actually very short lived" that depends on the size of the black hole.

    • @tonyatkinson2210
      @tonyatkinson2210 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Anything finite is short lived when compared to eternity

    • @JonathanMarcy
      @JonathanMarcy ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@tonyatkinson2210 recent scientific evidence suggest that eternity as we comprehend it exists with a massive black hole.
      The hypersphere theory suggests each such black hole exists within a system engulfed by another in an infinite loop that eventually loops back into the "starting" singularity. So it again depends on the size of the black hole. In theory the largest of those theorized black holes feeds in on itself, and is as such sulf sustained.

    • @tonyatkinson2210
      @tonyatkinson2210 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@JonathanMarcy what scientific evidence ?

    • @JonathanMarcy
      @JonathanMarcy ปีที่แล้ว

      @@tonyatkinson2210 they compared the math to what expansion would look like if it existed inside of a singularity. It predicted with as much accuracy as the big bang model can provide exactly the expansion that we see.

    • @tonyatkinson2210
      @tonyatkinson2210 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@JonathanMarcy really ? A novel prediction? Why haven’t I heard about this ? By the way you describe it - it’s a hugely significant paper . Where is this published ?

  • @Lcab-bh3wx
    @Lcab-bh3wx ปีที่แล้ว

    I don't know. Yep he doesn't
    Know.

  • @rjl7655
    @rjl7655 ปีที่แล้ว

    does anyone have any pot?

  • @chrisrace744
    @chrisrace744 ปีที่แล้ว

    This guy smokes sean carroll.

  • @wayneasiam65
    @wayneasiam65 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Who you looking at, Dude?

  • @jeremya1678
    @jeremya1678 ปีที่แล้ว

    5:22 he has no idea

  • @michaelsmith4904
    @michaelsmith4904 ปีที่แล้ว

    I'm disappointed that he stopped at only a googol years... no mention of Poincare recurrence or the possibility that the universe spontaneously generates from quantum fluctuations every 100 septendecillionplexplex years or so.

  • @donemigholzjr.7344
    @donemigholzjr.7344 ปีที่แล้ว

    .......................... Nothing about Relativity................................. It's like talking about Libya without mentioning Oil.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      Relativity isn't directly relevant to the effects he was talking about. It is indirectly relevant to the reasons why we know some of the evidence he mentioned.

  • @deanodebo
    @deanodebo ปีที่แล้ว +1

    At this point it’s pure fiction

    • @mikel4879
      @mikel4879 ปีที่แล้ว

      deanod • 😂
      Correct! Pure science fiction!
      The real Universe doesn't work like that at all. Everything is linked continuously and forever as a neverending real causal chain of 'cause and effect'.
      The neverending real causal chain can never be broken no matter what.
      For example, where's the complete real causal chain that forms the BORDER of a so-called "Black Hole"?🥴😏
      A so-called "black hole" ( which in reality is non-existent ) can't be isolated dynamically absolutely at all from its real 'exterior' realm.
      Any realm is a realm continuously connected to another causal realm, a real succession of causal interconnected entropic dynamisms, a continuous connected real emerging causal chain, a continuous, uninterrupted real and aggregated causal chain, etc.
      What's the real border of a so-called "black hole" made of causally, because it has to be CAUSALLY continuous and uninterrupted.😏
      Etc.

    • @deanodebo
      @deanodebo ปีที่แล้ว

      @@mikel4879
      Well. Causation is likely something you’re assuming without warrant.
      The physicists appeal to “the measurement problem” which mysteriously “causes” the wave function collapse from outside of the laws of physics. But that’s assuming the standard model of quantum physics.

    • @mikel4879
      @mikel4879 ปีที่แล้ว

      deanod • In any of your possible imaginations, scientific or not, show me that you can break in any way possible, real or hypothetical, the uninterrupted and neverending real causal chain, and only then I will believe you.
      Show me how you do it in reality step by step. You show me the explanation in real steps, if you can, or in theoretical hypothetical steps! I'm waiting!🥴
      Today's science is a humongous unreal theoretical mess concocted in time by highly indoctrinated perfect idiots. /
      Nothing collapses in reality when a human performs a measurement.
      What "collapses" is the shoddy theoretical model, the erroneous theoretical hypothesis.
      The real causal chain can't be stopped, no matter what you do, no matter the method of "observation" or the method of "measurement".
      The real dynamic of the Universe doesn't have any "mystery" at all.
      It is simple, direct, unstoppable, and continuously causal at any "micro" and "macro" scale.
      Etc.😏

  • @samc6231
    @samc6231 ปีที่แล้ว

    Still selling frankfurters as haute cuisine I see

  • @stephenwatts2649
    @stephenwatts2649 ปีที่แล้ว

    From the No-Thing thus sprang the Everything - a spiritual event entirely consistent, incidentally, with what your scientists call The Big Bang Theory.
    As the elements of all raced forth, time was created, for a thing was first here, then it was there - and the period it took to get from here to there was measurable.
    Just as the parts of Itself which are seen began to define themselves, "relative" to each other, so, too, did the parts which are unseen.
    God knew that for love to exist - and to know itself as pure love - its exact opposite had to exist as well. So God voluntarily created the great polarity - the absolute opposite of love - everything that love is not - what is now called fear. In the moment fear existed, love could exist as a thing that could be experienced.
    It is this creation of duality between love and its opposite which humans refer in their various mythologies as the birth of evil, the fall of Adam, the rebellion of Satan, and so forth.
    Just as you have chosen to personify pure love as the character you call God, so have you chosen to personify abject fear as the character you call the devil.
    This mythology has been mankind's early attempt to understand, and tell others in a way they could understand, a cosmic occurrence of which the human soul is deeply aware, but of which the mind can barely conceive.
    In rendering the universe as a divided version of Itself, God produced, from pure energy, all that now exists - both seen and unseen.
    In other words, not only was the physical universe thus created, but the metaphysical universe as well. The part of God which forms the second half of the Am/Not Am equation also exploded into infinite number of units smaller than the whole. These energy units you would call spirits.
    In some of your religious mythologies it is stated that "God the Father" had many spirit children. This parallel to the human experience of life multiplying itself seems to be the only way the masses could be made to hold in reality the idea of the sudden appearance - the sudden existence - of countless spirits in the "Kingdom of Heaven."
    In this instance, your mythical tales and stories are not so far from ultimate reality - for the endless spirits comprising the totality of Me are, in a cosmic sense, My offspring.
    My divine purpose in dividing Me was to create sufficient parts of Me so that I could know Myself experientially. There is only one way for the Creator to know Itself experientially as the Creator, and that is to create. And so I gave to each of the countless parts of Me (to all of My spirit children) the same power to create which I have as the whole.
    This is what your religions mean when they say that you were created in the "image and likeness of God."
    This doesn't mean, as some have suggested, that our physical bodies look alike (although God can adopt whatever physical form God chooses for a particular purpose). It does mean that our essence is the same. We are composed of the same stuff. We ARE the "same stuff"! With all the same properties and abilities - including the ability to create physical reality out of thin air.
    My purpose in creating you, My spiritual offspring, was for Me to know Myself as God. I have no way to do that save through you. Thus it can be said (and has been, many times) that My purpose for you is that you should know yourself as Me.
    This seems so amazingly simple, yet it becomes very complex - because there is only one way for you to know yourself as Me, and that is for you first to know yourself as not Me.
    Now try to follow this because this gets very subtle here.
    There is one way I could have caused all of My spiritual children to know themselves as parts of Me - and that was simply to tell them. This I did. But you see, it was not enough for Spirit to simply know Itself as God, or part of God, or children of God, or inheritors of the kingdom (or whatever mythology you want to use).
    As I've already explained, knowing something, and experiencing it, are two different things. Spirit longed to know Itself experientially (just as I did!). Conceptual awareness was not enough for you. So I devised a plan. It is the most extraordinary idea in all the universe - and the most spectacular collaboration. I say collaboration because all of you are in it with Me.
    Under the plan, you as pure spirit would enter the physical universe just created. This is because physicality is the only way to know experientially what you know conceptually. It is, in fact, the reason I created the physical cosmos to begin with - and the system of relativity which governs it, and all creation.
    Once in the physical universe, you, My spirit children, could experience what you know of yourself - but first, you had to come to know the opposite. To explain this simplistically, you cannot know yourself as tall unless and until you become aware of short. You cannot experience the part of yourself that you call fat unless you also come to know thin.
    taken to the ultimate logic, you cannot experience yourself as what you are until you've encountered what you are not. This is the purpose of the theory of relativity, and all physical life. It is by which you are not that you yourself are defined.
    Now in the case of the ultimate knowing - in the case of knowing yourself as the Creator - you cannot experience your Self as creator unless and until you create. And you cannot create yourself until you un-create yourself. In a sense, you have to first "not be" in order to be.
    Do you follow? Stay with it.
    Of course, there is no way for you to not be who and what you are - you simply are that (pure, creative spirit), have been always, and always will be. So, you did the next best thing. You caused yourself to forget Who You Really Are.
    Upon entering the physical universe, you relinquished your remembrance of yourself. This allows you to choose to be Who You Are, rather than simply wake up in the castle, so to speak.
    It is in the act of choosing to be, rather than simply being told that you are, a part of God that you experience yourself as being at total choice, which is what, by definition, God is. Yet how can you have a choice about something over which there is no choice? You cannot not be My offspring no matter how hard you try - but you can forget.
    You are, have always been, and will always be, a divine part of the divine whole, a member of the body. That is why the act of rejoining the whole, of returning to God, is called remembrance. You actually choose to re-member Who You Really Are, or to join together with the various parts of you to experience the all of you - which is to say, the All of Me.
    Your job on Earth, therefore, is not to learn (because you already know), but to re-member Who You Are. And to re-member who everyone else is. That is why a big part of your job is to remind others (that is, to re-mind them), so that they can re-member also.
    All the wonderful spiritual teachers have been doing just that. It is your sole purpose. That is to say, your soul purpose.

  • @koopsjunta
    @koopsjunta ปีที่แล้ว

    😳🤯

  • @willnzsurf
    @willnzsurf ปีที่แล้ว

    🌴😎💯

  • @glorifygod1480
    @glorifygod1480 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    ✝️ *God loves you. He offers you forgiveness of your sins.*
    ✝️ Repent and believe in the gospel
    *And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.*
    Hebrews 9:27‭-‬28 NKJV
    ✝️ The gospel of Jesus Christ
    *For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,*
    I Corinthians 15:3‭-‬4 nkjv ✝️

  • @JungleJargon
    @JungleJargon ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Trying to put an age on the universe is ludicrous. There is no single rate of the passing of time in this physical fabrication called the universe. Likewise, there is no single measure of distance.

    • @Gsp_in_NYC
      @Gsp_in_NYC ปีที่แล้ว

      time is an illusion, correct

    • @kos-mos1127
      @kos-mos1127 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      The Universe is not a fabrication. The Universe is real what is not real is are our categories.

    • @JungleJargon
      @JungleJargon ปีที่แล้ว

      @@kos-mos1127 The universel is a real fabrication.

    • @therick363
      @therick363 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@JungleJargon ahhh cherry picking as always

    • @ALavin-en1kr
      @ALavin-en1kr 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The Ancient Greek philosophers saw all as flux. Nothing was stable or cast in bronze; their view matches that of modern physics. However, in contrast to Darwinism, in which everything is solely elemental and random; it was understood that there were three dimensions, not just the one that materialists posit. The dimensions were: Consciousness; Mind; and the Elemental. Each dimension had its own space; the elemental one being the smallest.
      Consciousness is the hard problem for materialist philosophers today; is it fundamental and Mind is it elemental; emerging with quantum events. Materialists are troubled by consciousness being fundamental as the next question is, if it is fundamental and universal does it have a Self. That is their nightmare but one they have to face realistically sooner rather than later. The advent of A.I. raises all these questions. If A.I. has consciousness it will be A.C. as humans can only imitate what is fundamental but cannot create anything that is fundamental.

  • @Kenneth-ts7bp
    @Kenneth-ts7bp ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Yet, all the foundations of the cosmos are supernatural, annulling any claim of an old cosmos. God created most of the universe in a 24 hour period, but He did it in the supernatural realm where the refractive index and time frames are effectively zero. Time only exists due to the parameters God ordained.
    Within 200 years, Jesus will return and the 7th day of rest for the planet will begin and then at the end of that 1000 year period, Jesus will destroy this cosmos and make a new one.

  • @AAA9549-w7w
    @AAA9549-w7w 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I thought some people I met were talking nonsense, but the person's BS topped it all.
    How would a used car salesman know about anything?!
    Metaphysician philosopher

  • @cdb5001
    @cdb5001 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This is all a bunch of crap. I bet this guy can't even give me the winning lottery number for this weekend's SuperMax, but now I'm supposed to believe he can say what will happen in billions of years?

  • @canyonroots
    @canyonroots ปีที่แล้ว

    The further out is less predictable, so he states 10 to the 100 zeros years is when black holes will evaporate. Logical fantasy.

  • @S3RAVA3LM
    @S3RAVA3LM ปีที่แล้ว

    Nice one CTT, but I gotcha! Physics denotes 'Nature', implying the phenomenon - samsara. Enternity is a transcendental state to the phenomenal plane and is Noumenal. The question is not a paradox, and I don't like the word dichotomy because it is nescience, rather is poor inquiry and is very telling of these modern mathematicians in the guise of science.
    What is this, 'see who can hit the pinata'
    I'm not impressed!

  • @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC
    @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC ปีที่แล้ว +3

    *"Infinity"* is a misunderstood classification. All the term "infinity" presents is that there are no barriers to restrict an ongoing process. *Example:* Numbers start at zero (0) and continue indefinitely (infinity) because there are no barriers set in place to prevent it from happening. Our human lives are "finite" because we have a barrier set in place called "death" that ends our process.
    So, when people start making claims that the universe has "infinite origin" they are arguing something that is impossible. If there are no barriers set in place for the ongoing existence of the universe, then it is free to exist forever, ... but the same does not apply to the "beginning" of the universe.
    ... Everything has a starting point! (Sorry, "Multiverse" worshipers!)

    • @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC
      @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @SamoaVsEverybody_814 *"If your claim that Existence had a beginning is true... then you would have to admit that there's such a thing as "Nothing."*
      ... No, that's not true! I can claim that there has always been a juxtaposition of Existence and Nonexistence with neither being conceivable until they are logically addressed. That wouldn't be an "infinite origin" but rather a "timeless state" (a condition where no change takes place).
      The instant that Existence and Nonexistence are logically addressed serves as a measurable "origin point." That logical assessment took place 13.8 billion years ago.
      *"So far as we know nothing is impossible because there has to always be something."*
      ... Agreed! (See above). We assign Zero (0) to nothing in order to render "nothing" conceivable. "Zero" is like a _whipping boy_ assigned to reconcile the inconceivable construct known as "nothing." All of the issues associated with conceiving "nothingness" is placed on the number "0" and then we nail it to the cross of logical inconceivability.
      *"When you astute so adamantly that simply because we can trace the origins of OUR Universe back to a single point, you grossly undermine the potential of a larger reality... Possibly infinite into the past & future."*
      ... The past is a database of all events that have ever happened; the present is the now, and the future is a specific degree of potential based on past and present events. You cannot have an "infinite past" without sacrificing an origin point in the process.
      *Example:* If you claim that quarks have existed forever (infinitely existing universe), then you just took a whole bunch of questions about our reality off the table. You can no longer ask. _"Where do quarks come from?"_ because they've always just been here, right?
      Any existential proposition that takes questions "of the table" should be considered suspect. In the case of the universe, when everything in it presents a finite origin point (i.e., galaxies, Earth, dinosaurs, humans, you and me, etc.), then to claim the universe doesn't have an origin point requires *"special pleading"* which is a logical fallacy.
      *Challenge:* Explain to me in simple terms how something can exist without first being brought into existence. ... Will you do that for me please?

    • @kos-mos1127
      @kos-mos1127 ปีที่แล้ว

      There is no origin to the universe. Space and time are the most misclassified concepts that we have. Ancient Greeks have already explained why the Cosmos cannot have an origin. Space and Time have no reality they are measures that the mind uses to categorize reality. It's not that the Cosmos has no limit in space and time. It is that the Cosmos cannot be limited by space and time because they are conceptual rather than real.
      The Cosmos has no beginning nor an end. (Sorry "Origin" worshipers!)

    • @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC
      @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC ปีที่แล้ว

      @SamoaVsEverybody_814 *"Exactly. Quarks came from SOMETHING. And the "something" quarks came from came from "something" else. Infinite reducability is why Reality doesn't have a starting point."*
      ... Now, see? You messed up! You argue that everything comes from something else and then argue there doesn't have to be an origin point based on this fact. Well, what is the *very first thing to exist* from which all other things have supposedly emerged? Did this "first thing" have an origin point ... or was its origin "infinite" (special)?
      This is what happens when you try to play "kick the can" with infinity.
      *" If you're hinting at a "god" concept it's definitely not out of the question. Problem is is it's not the type of "god" humans worship"*
      ... I do not believe in God. Just like with the Multiverse, theism's God doesn't have an "origin point," which makes it impossible.

    • @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC
      @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC ปีที่แล้ว

      @SamoaVsEverybody_814 *""Sorry, 'Multiverse' worshippers!" Imagine thinking you know more than guys like Max Tegmark or Sir Roger Penrose, lol. Sorry, TH-cam "physicist!""*
      ... "Argument from Authority" is also a logical fallacy, and I am not a physicist or a mathematician. I am a skeptic.

    • @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC
      @0-by-1_Publishing_LLC ปีที่แล้ว

      @SamoaVsEverybody_814 *"You just can't make any logical argument for Reality on the whole having any type of beginning."*
      ... Not only can I, but I already have! I even attached "logic" to my claim. You have yet to explain how something can exist without first being brought into existence. That was the "challenge" I offered you, but you have yet to answer the question.
      *"Simulation theory could explain some of it away but it's unfalsifiable."*
      ... So is Multiverse, Many Worlds, Parallel Universes, Branes and String Theory with its 26 imaginary dimensions.
      I know you love Max Tegmark and the many others, but please explain to me how something can exist without first being brought into existence. Will you clearly explain, please?

  • @A-X-25
    @A-X-25 ปีที่แล้ว

    Can you use logic and count:1,2,3,4,5,6, etc, and reach the infinite? Some idiots spend lifetimes to know this. A yogi can experience this in 21 minutes.🤣🤣👽👽

  • @davannaleah
    @davannaleah ปีที่แล้ว

    Once black holes are gone, there will be no matter in the universe, so, essentially, time and space will also cease to exist.

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      According to Roger Penrose, that's not quite right, but also not far off from the truth depending how you look at it. I recommend you look up Conformal Cyclic Cosmology, I think you might find it pretty interesting.

    • @davannaleah
      @davannaleah ปีที่แล้ว

      @@simonhibbs887 that is the principle of CCC. Time and space cease to exist

    • @simonhibbs887
      @simonhibbs887 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@davannaleah Surely in CCC the universe phase shifts into a new eon with a recalibration of space and time.

  • @rl7012
    @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    The universe is not eternal or infinite.

    • @neffetSnnamremmiZ
      @neffetSnnamremmiZ ปีที่แล้ว

      But the Life, that can pull itself out of the nothing! So it is eternal!

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@neffetSnnamremmiZ Life did not pull itself out of nothing. Abiogenesis is a myth. Life is finite, not eternal. The universe is finite, not eternal.

  • @matterasmachine
    @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว +1

    there was no big bang

    • @matterasmachine
      @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว

      @SamoaVsEverybody_814 nothing expends. It’s evaporation of photons.

    • @therick363
      @therick363 ปีที่แล้ว

      What was the Big Bang?
      Why was there no big bang?

    • @matterasmachine
      @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว

      @@therick363 bullshit based on wrong assumption that space expands

    • @therick363
      @therick363 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@matterasmachine the question was WHAT was the Big Bang. If you can’t even say what it was then you definitely can’t back up your claim that there was no big bang. Not to mention that you have to back up that it’s “bullshit”.
      Now answer the question please. What was the Big Bang,

    • @matterasmachine
      @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว

      @@therick363 no expansion - no bigbang

  • @matterasmachine
    @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว

    where exactly all of that will evaporate? photons evaporate too, so after some time new stars will be formed.

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว

      How can photons evaporate?

    • @matterasmachine
      @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว

      @@rl7012 by emitting quantums of matter/energy, which are responsible for quantum of action. It's also called "electromagnetic radiation".

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@matterasmachine But photons do not exist, so how can they evaporate? And evaporation is do with liquids.

    • @matterasmachine
      @matterasmachine ปีที่แล้ว

      @@rl7012 ok. Photons slowly annihilate, lose energy. Why photons don’t exist? In that case nothing exists

    • @rl7012
      @rl7012 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@matterasmachine And even if photons did exist, they can't evaporate. All energy can do is transform its form. So the photons would be transforming from photons into electromagnetic radiation. That is a transformation not an evaporation.

  • @richardleetbluesharmonicac7192
    @richardleetbluesharmonicac7192 ปีที่แล้ว

    So glad the big bang is dead

  • @maxwellsimoes238
    @maxwellsimoes238 ปีที่แล้ว

    He predicts Universe are worth less phich. Predict right NOW Universe are unpredicted . He not show up how picuret Universe though fundamental law of phich . He opinion in Universe atributes are pedantic baseless.

  • @hoon_sol
    @hoon_sol ปีที่แล้ว

    Talking to physicists who still subscribe to Big Bang cosmology is a total waste of time. If your starting assumption is blatantly false, you're never going to get anywhere close to the truth.