Apologies for the terrible audio for some of the parts in this video. I was experimenting and it went horribly 😂 And that’s why I went with theoretical astrophysics :P P.s. I comment less in this vid about a lot of stuff cause I talk about a bunch of these things in the Matrix video I made!
@@Ghost-pb4ts It's a possibility......so make sure to try to get a "High score" for the game...and NO...that does NOT mean "Amount of currency in your bank account at the moment of your Death". "High score" means you've done the task (whole point of the game) well, oh and BTW it is VERY likely that to avoid having Players "Rage quit" the game...there will also be a Reward/Punishment system put in place as incentive to do your best to get a passing Score/Grade
Just wanted to say thank you. As someone with mental health instability, I have never understood some of the more complex topics you discuss. However, it seems to click in my brain and make sense the way you explain it. Again, thank you.
my proof we live in a simulation is simple, whenever i play games and i have to do somthing important ingame, my parents always calls me, Everytime, coincidence? I THINK NOT!
What if a civilization ran simulations whose perceived time runs much faster relative to such civilization to see if they could prevent or delay the end of the universe? Or maybe to last even longer than the universe they enter simulations which allow them to experience reality at trillions of times the pace of humans, like how flies can react faster than humans.
nice video. i have an interest in physics so it's nice to get little tidbits of extra info in addition to the kurzesagt videos. also if you like these kinds of concepts, you might find the ideas in the game Dyson Sphere Program interesting. a lot of the lore has similar tidbits (it's basically a factorio type game, but the basic premise is that humanity has retreated into a simulated universe and you are responsible for an ever-growing energy demand, hence making a dyson sphere being the end-goal.)
12:12 We do that right now... Simulate stars, planets, galaxies, black holes... cause getting there is too hard. lol Thing is if we could... we would go there; But we would run thousands of simulations first. P.S. We as humans have video games based on simulating the life and creation of ant Colonies... so saying that advanced civilizations wouldnt simulate us cause we are like ants doesnt fit.
Two things about the simulation theory: 1. Since it is not testable or falsifiable, it is not a valid scientific hypothesis. 2. If living in a simulation is indistinguishable from living in reality, it doesn't actually matter which is true.
Another thing is that they assumed the simulation is realtime. What if the universe just stops to render the next frame, we'd have no way of knowing right?
How could that floating in space brain live long enough to think about anything if there would be temperature close to absolute 0, no food and no oxygen? Life can't exist under such conditions
Huh if you're going into the philosophical side of Kurzgesagt I'll be amped to watch your opinion on Positive Nihilism. Definitely one of the media pieces that has shaped my personal outlook on life the most. Though it is pretty removed from physics as a topic
What if we get to a point though where simulation technology becomes so advanced that we have nesting simulations and someone were to delve so deep into these simulations that they eventually lose track of how many levels down they are and end up stuck in a simulation thinking they are out or find out that they themselves are just another simulation within a branch of simulations.
Does a brain need a body to conjure a thought? And I think the whole brain thing is just a simplification of something else that is capable of having thoughts and/or simulating its own reality. We're just calling them brains cause that makes sense to us at a human level. At least, that's what I think. In other news, why am I explaining something to a non-existent being in my self-made non-real reality?
maybe the brain is just the "consciousness" some form of structure able to think and having the "memories" and able to exist in the void. all of our understanding about reality would be fake, a brain needing a body to function is imagined by the brain in this case. what i want to know is why as the main character of my imagination, i couldn't have imagined a cooler version of existence... :(
Sorry to write this under every video, I just don't know if you have read my comments. I just wanted to say that I highly recommend the channel "ScienceClic English". I love how they can explain complicated topics clearly by intuition without compromising on accuracy while still being captivating. Every bit is nicely spaced out to give the audience time to process, and no information is extra. I find all of their videos amazing, but if I had to pick one, it would be "What is General Relativity?". They also made an explanation + visualization of Falling into the black hole, I'd say more accurate than Kurzgesagt and I learned more from it. I love both Kurzgesagt and ScienceClic English. I think Kurzgesagt is more on the entertainment side while ScienceClic is more on the rigor, educational side. But you learn super interesting things from both of them!
On the topic of the boltzmann brain: It makes complete sense if given infinite time in an infinite universe, yes. However, surely our current understanding of physics dictates that while time may be infinite (if photons do not decay), the existence of the atoms required to make up such an object is very much on a ticking clock owing to dark energy? Therefore, our probability of a boltzmann brain forming goes from 1 all the way back down to an infinitesimally small number, right? Plus any such object would need to form instantaneously in order to have the whole brain functioning all at once before parts freeze/die - which again is theoretically possible given infinite time, but pretty much brings the probability down to 0 in a universe which contains dark energy.
Isn't a assumption for a boltzman brain that space is finite, if space is truly infinite and time is truly infinite, then u how is the probability that's particles can form my brain 1??
I would love for you to give a reaction to what the Destiny franchise calls energy types/subclasses. There are many many wild theories about if Solar is the Strong Force, Arc as the Electromagnetic, Stasis as the increase of entropy to an object or space and bringing it to a true 0°K, Void being Gravity or even Dark Energy/Matter?, and last the newest one just revealed, Strand which could possibly be a okay on string theory?…. I would love your take on what they are and the idea behind being paracasual.
Mild Speculation (from last video): The whole talk about space expanding at an increasing rate confused me, because it would make more sense for its rate to decrease. What if it is not expanding at all? For it to expand it would need to expand into something. If there is something for it to expand into, then it shouldn't create new space out of nothing. What if the new space already existed? What if it was translated in the thing we think it expands into? Wouldn't we perceive it as expanding or shrinking as it translates? If this were the case, could we use the change in the expansion rate to tell us the shape of space?
A theory is the black holes singularity. Imagine our universe is nothing else than that. The „expansion“ could be nothing else than the growing mass of the black hole, while we life somewhere in the infinite mass of the singularity, not beeing able to ever escape the event horizon.
@@creatorshorizon5125 I find this topic very interesting as well as your visualization, but have a few questions and would like to better clarify where my confusion stems from. Even if we attribute the gain in mass as an external space feeding into a region, what direction is that mass expanding into? Wouldn't it be shrinking/condensing (shrinking as in size not rate) instead of expanding if it wasn't translating in another direction? It can't occupy the same region of space unless it was condensing. I am only pointing this out to better understand how space expanding would relate in this example. When we say the rate of expansion for space is increasing, do we also mean space is increasing in size? Maybe understanding this would help clarify my last question. To expand on my point of confusion, I was specifically confused on how the data was interpreted. Specifically, the time delay of light? The explanations I heard on this data don't seem to clarify how this connects with the method of interpretation used on the data. It was explained in a way that made it seem as if the rate was smaller for regions of space closer to us and larger for regions farther from us. If this were the case, why wouldn't this mean the rate of expansion is increasing with distance but decreasing with time (because distance and time are different if we are using light to gather this data compared to if we measure that data by going physically to that region of space)? Sorry for the large text, I have been trying to connect these ideas for some time.
@@JracoMeter i See, you think a lot about this stuff. I like it! (: Well, to answer all the points you made, we would have to take a lot more into account, than just expanding or contracting space. That’s why theories like these exist, but couldn’t be proven yet, since it’s not that easy. Just think about everything we don’t know yet. There is dark matter for example, which could influence us and the universe more than we actually think. There is also a lot in quantum physics we don’t understand yet, not to mention knowledge about space-time itself, where Einstein spend his whole life on math just to create another „theory“. There probably are multiple answers to your questions that, based on our current knowledge, could all be correct. Still, that’s what makes Physiks extremely interesting and mysterious. Humanity will find out eventually, but until then a very exiting time awaits us
If everything we learned is incorrect according to the Boltzmann Brain theory then the theory it self can not be correct it’s a paradox. Correct me if I’m wrong
the point is that it wouldnt matter if its a paradox or not, because if we really are the imagination of a boltzmann brain, then wether our physics are wrong or not doesnt change the fact we are still just imaginary, so the created paradox is entirely irrelevent and only exists as a paradox based on our understanding of physics, but is said understanding is just wrong, nothing would change as far as the brain is concerned think of our dreams, we do shit in them that create paradoxs in our dreams, for example we can simultaniously need oxygen to breathe yet fly through the void of space, this is a paradox because we cant both not need and need oxygen at the same time, but our brains literally dont care about paraxoes because it doesnt exist, its not real, its all just a dream
I don't really like this vision for the simulation theory that we are just simulated brains and that stuff like bacteria doesn't exists and is created when we see it as if this was like a videogame. To me the most believable way for us to be a simulation is that the whole universe is a very complex cellular automaton be it deterministic or non, from a universe more complex than ours. We as humans ( all life in the universe for that matter) would be the evolution of self replicating patterns, not specifically designed. The speed of light would be the speed of action propagation.
If we are simulated, it means we are based on a reality. A reality which itself has specific laws and behaviors like us. If we are based on an observer in a reality then it is impossible to not make a contradiction to that reality which we are simulated to believe we are a part of.(in short: in a non real simulation like a human imagination, contradictions and paradoxes are possible and will happen) so far we believed simulated consciousness of a reality in a simulation have not found any contradictions in the "simulation" we're in. Then So far we are in reality. It is so if we have free will.
I don't think the idea of Boltzmann brain is right. Because there are a lot of dependent variables. For example, what's the probability of getting a six after two dice roll? The second depends on the first. If you go to infinity like what's the probability of getting a six in a row to infinity will be zero, it's impossible. Same with particles. For a particle to form some sort of structure it has to rely on another structure. This is what happened. First stars, then planets, then water, etc. But with no structure in outer space, the probability is just zero. It's like saying what's the probability of this given we have this given we have this etc. In outer space will be zero. Unless it follows the steps we already know.
However much added responsibility of which comes with the knowledge that with anything with possibility, when given enough time, becomes an inevitability. The problem is that physicists and legal analysts haven't gotten together to decide on what decimal or fraction of a percentage defines 'of negligible risk' but then so too would follow morality. How heavy the crown of knowledge...
On the topic on 11:50: The simulations might or might not reflect the universe that the "gods" live in. If they do not, it is safe to assume that the "gods" had no interest in even living in their simulation and might not care a lot for its outcomes. That would be like asking somebody if he wanted to be Mario in the actual Super Mario games.
Like you alluded to in another video: Everything/existence is a paradox. There is nothing to understand here and yet there is. Everything happens with 100 % probability/certainty (because things are what they are) and yet it doesn't (as far as our understanding of probability is concerned). A nothing cannot exist by definition, a something cannot be something without a nothing and nothing cannot be nothing without something from which to differentiate it. Science cannot explain anything and yet it does. We use logic despite nothing being logical about any of this.
would it be bad if all this were a simulation? i feel like it doesn't matter. Simulation or not we are here and have a lot to discover. And if it is simulated .... ? it is our simulated reality
If you throw a baby, including its brain, into space, will it suddenly create an entire universe in its mind? I think it would just die. So, why would a botzmann brain do anything differently. Doesn't a brain need to learn before it can create anything?
Boltzmann brain doesn't matter. There's no one who can tell (or at least you don't know), whether you're in a simulation (even your brain is simulated), real Universe, Boltzmann brain or brain in a jar (world is simulated, but your brain is "real"). If they're identical, all of them is you at the "same time". That goes for parallel Universes, or even copies in this Universe, or anything else you can imagine. It doesn't matter when or where you are in this sense. All that matters (for your brain) is information your brain is experiencing. Even if you knew that you're a Boltzmann brain 100%, you still might be a Boltzmann brain in a simulation, in a jar, or on Earth being insane. It doesn't matter.
i have a question. lets say the theory of branching universes is real and each time i flip the coin the probability fully resets from the odds of flipping heads 100 times to the odds of 99 and 98. each time i flip heads i gradually decrease the entropy of the universe i occupy with each successful coin flip. lets say i make it to 100 heads flipped. what happens to the entropy of the universe after?
That's just the fuckin thing. I die, and I don't know time when I'm ded as ass. BAM blink and you'll miss it! Infinity happens and I wake up somewhere else! Will I remember? Will be a human being? God knows I'm gonna wake up freash as fuck. Let's gooooooo
Can you tell me what the difference between infinity and eternity is? Infinity doesn't happen. It never ends. To say infinity happens is to say it ended at some point. When you are dead is when you will fully grasp and understand what eternity is. Its impossible for a mortal mind ( a mind bound to a mortal body ) to comprehend it.
except human generations if under optimal conditions will generate brains exponentially. a boltsmann brain is 1 assuming it cant reproduce. 1 in however long of a time it takes. and then another. and another. thats a very long time to wait for just TWO boltzman brains. you just have to wait a century for 2 brains to become 3 or 4 5 6 7 and it goes on. to me boltzmann brains are actually not that special for a big reason. theres no context. ya you can draw a cartoon character and even give it a personality but what good is it without others and a setting and a reason and a purpose. imo boltzmann brains are a waste of time to think about. who cares? just because the universe can simulate a brain doesnt mean it should or would. this is the problem with math were getting too exciting about possibility and probability over the facts. i mean everything we know about physics and astrophysics comes with a particular degree of uncertainty as it is. and here we stand speculating things that might as well not happen at all just because we think we have an understanding of what does happen. the anthropic principle is just the same.
the point is that in an infinate amount of time there must therefore be an infinate amount of boltzman brains, because they had an infinate amount of time to generate, whereas us humans have only had what? 3 million years? and our population didnt even grow that much until recently, afterall we expanded 6+ billion in just 150 years while yes we expand exponentially, an infinate amount of time is still ALWAYS going to be greater than any amount of time our species has existed
@@XiaoYueMao but how long will it take for just 1 boltzmann brain? An infinite amount of time one might presume as it were. To me the amount of boltzmann brains is irellevent and frankly immaterial. What the POINT IS is theres infinite time for anything to occure in a system of increasing entropy. All im saying is..so what? Whats the big deal with that? Cool something weird finally happened after soooooooooo long nobody is even alive anymore to put it on record. Wow stunning. I just dont care about these probability games weve invented. Move onto real science thanks
@@TheFlameGarden wether anyone would be alive after an infinate amount of time is entirely irrelevent, since it only needs to occur once for the brain to imagine everything we know as reality, it doesnt NEED anything else to be alive
@@XiaoYueMao How can the brain imagine anything without learning? A brain that just appears is a blank slate, yes? Without another to teach it, how can it do anything?
It's funny when people use the same arguments for the existence of God, people have a problem, but a brain in space, that's totally possible. It's just a problem of postulating an infinite number of possibilities, and an infinite amount of time to get all those possibilities, which of course is impossible. As soon as one possibility is duplicated, you just have infinity possibilities minus 1, which is less. So you have to assume that the infinity of time is infinitely greater than just possibilities of matter and there is no reason to do that. Take a dice that has 6 faces, and a time of 6. If you ever get twice the same number, one number won't appear ever. In reality all possibilities are bounded in certain ways, otherwise everything would be random. Just the fact that physics exists as a discipline means there are bounds, and some possibilities come back more often than others, and it is common sense as well. It's not to say there isn't a simulation, but we will never be able to prove it one way or another unless someone goes out of it, then they would perhaps know. Also the more general way to refute those speculations is simply to say that the Universe might be a circle and all matter goes in circle as well, so not all is possible, and that's the end of those speculations. Things could move for eternity in a pattern and always the same pattern. What we consider as chance, is just part of that pattern that will reoccur eternally or not. If everything is possible that is possible too and a certainty under those same rules, so there is no simulation. I think it is called the teapot fallacy. Two things contradict each others, so you can then prove just about anything.
Eh? Can you explain? Do you mean you " feel " like nothing is " real " ? I felt that one time. It felt like nothing around me was " real ". Not my mom, who I hugged at the time because I was freaking out, not the room i was in or anything in it, and not my body either. The only thing that " felt real " was my mind. It's a very weird thing to ACTUALLY FEEL that something isn't real because something being real or not is just a concept. Not something a person can actually feel, most of the time...it that what you were talking about?
If we are simulated, wouldn't that mean that we are simulated of something else? Could be a clue to who may have created our simulation. Kinda reminds me of "god created man in his own image" so they say... lol I'm not trying to hint at anything, it's just some mental randomness.
With the amount of computing power it would take to simulate all this, you’d think they’d use it to make their own lives better. The star based computer is the worst idea ever concieved, so let’s take the example of a city computer that simulates a universe. Who does that help? Our world sucks, so why would they simulate it so poorly?? And even if they could simulate a rad ass world, still who are they doing it for? If they like uploaded people’s brains into this simulation a la The Matrix, you’d think they’d be so advanced that they could just make life awesome in real life. Simulations theory to me sounds like philosophy gone wild. Occam’s razor says this is all a load of bullshit.
Why aren't you showing your whole face? Are you shy, do you have a missing ear, or the other side of your face is burned out? Be yourself and stop hiding, I think it's good advice to be more confident. Just curious.
@Dylan J. Dance is there any way we can contact you to ask questions? ive been pondering a bunch of science questions and i just wanted to do to get your thoughts on some of them. :)
![Hacking Reality [Official Film]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vJi3_znm7ZE/mqdefault.jpg)
Apologies for the terrible audio for some of the parts in this video. I was experimenting and it went horribly 😂 And that’s why I went with theoretical astrophysics :P
P.s. I comment less in this vid about a lot of stuff cause I talk about a bunch of these things in the Matrix video I made!
What if this is an alien video game called 'Earth'?
@@KingOfGamesss so this rick and morty episode hit me real hard
Imagine we are aliens/god/AI playing the game "live as human"
@@Ghost-pb4ts It's a possibility......so make sure to try to get a "High score" for the game...and NO...that does NOT mean "Amount of currency in your bank account at the moment of your Death". "High score" means you've done the task (whole point of the game) well, oh and BTW it is VERY likely that to avoid having Players "Rage quit" the game...there will also be a Reward/Punishment system put in place as incentive to do your best to get a passing Score/Grade
Just wanted to say thank you. As someone with mental health instability, I have never understood some of the more complex topics you discuss. However, it seems to click in my brain and make sense the way you explain it. Again, thank you.
my proof we live in a simulation is simple, whenever i play games and i have to do somthing important ingame, my parents always calls me, Everytime, coincidence? I THINK NOT!
You literally inspired me to study physics
What if a civilization ran simulations whose perceived time runs much faster relative to such civilization to see if they could prevent or delay the end of the universe?
Or maybe to last even longer than the universe they enter simulations which allow them to experience reality at trillions of times the pace of humans, like how flies can react faster than humans.
the newsletter is great so far! really enjoying the AI artwork ☺️
yo love the videos
it doesn't even need to be a human brain spontaneously popping into existence. any form of brain capable of hallucinating this reality would do
What a terrifying idea 🤣
Highly recommend doing a live stream for this - you could do it as a Q&A, turn on your super chats, and do a bunch of test 1 test 2s ;)
What if this life is "the void"? Millions of brains with feet and arms walking around..
nice video. i have an interest in physics so it's nice to get little tidbits of extra info in addition to the kurzesagt videos.
also if you like these kinds of concepts, you might find the ideas in the game Dyson Sphere Program interesting. a lot of the lore has similar tidbits (it's basically a factorio type game, but the basic premise is that humanity has retreated into a simulated universe and you are responsible for an ever-growing energy demand, hence making a dyson sphere being the end-goal.)
12:12 We do that right now... Simulate stars, planets, galaxies, black holes... cause getting there is too hard. lol Thing is if we could... we would go there; But we would run thousands of simulations first.
P.S. We as humans have video games based on simulating the life and creation of ant Colonies... so saying that advanced civilizations wouldnt simulate us cause we are like ants doesnt fit.
Two things about the simulation theory:
1. Since it is not testable or falsifiable, it is not a valid scientific hypothesis.
2. If living in a simulation is indistinguishable from living in reality, it doesn't actually matter which is true.
Another thing is that they assumed the simulation is realtime. What if the universe just stops to render the next frame, we'd have no way of knowing right?
after reading the Boltzmann brain theory now there is another thing that will keep me up at night
How could that floating in space brain live long enough to think about anything if there would be temperature close to absolute 0, no food and no oxygen? Life can't exist under such conditions
Well, perception if time. The brain may live a nanosecond, but in that nanosecond it builds your entire life
@@bigtareec does it ever make the whole body or just the brain?
Huh if you're going into the philosophical side of Kurzgesagt I'll be amped to watch your opinion on Positive Nihilism. Definitely one of the media pieces that has shaped my personal outlook on life the most. Though it is pretty removed from physics as a topic
What if we get to a point though where simulation technology becomes so advanced that we have nesting simulations and someone were to delve so deep into these simulations that they eventually lose track of how many levels down they are and end up stuck in a simulation thinking they are out or find out that they themselves are just another simulation within a branch of simulations.
Very interesting video as usual. I just have a question: how can a Boltzmann brain function without a body?
Does a brain need a body to conjure a thought? And I think the whole brain thing is just a simplification of something else that is capable of having thoughts and/or simulating its own reality. We're just calling them brains cause that makes sense to us at a human level. At least, that's what I think. In other news, why am I explaining something to a non-existent being in my self-made non-real reality?
The same way an engine can work without a car.
@@fatkart7641 you still need fuel tho
maybe the brain is just the "consciousness" some form of structure able to think and having the "memories" and able to exist in the void. all of our understanding about reality would be fake, a brain needing a body to function is imagined by the brain in this case. what i want to know is why as the main character of my imagination, i couldn't have imagined a cooler version of existence... :(
@@hzhang1228 maybe cause your brain is masochistic xD
00:08:42 that is only in low entropy scenarios. REALLY high entropy scenarios actually tend towards lower entropy.
You should look into videos on rokos basilisk, a terrifying thought experiment.
Sorry to write this under every video, I just don't know if you have read my comments.
I just wanted to say that I highly recommend the channel "ScienceClic English".
I love how they can explain complicated topics clearly by intuition without compromising on accuracy while still being captivating. Every bit is nicely spaced out to give the audience time to process, and no information is extra.
I find all of their videos amazing, but if I had to pick one, it would be "What is General Relativity?". They also made an explanation + visualization of Falling into the black hole, I'd say more accurate than Kurzgesagt and I learned more from it.
I love both Kurzgesagt and ScienceClic English. I think Kurzgesagt is more on the entertainment side while ScienceClic is more on the rigor, educational side. But you learn super interesting things from both of them!
On the topic of the boltzmann brain: It makes complete sense if given infinite time in an infinite universe, yes. However, surely our current understanding of physics dictates that while time may be infinite (if photons do not decay), the existence of the atoms required to make up such an object is very much on a ticking clock owing to dark energy? Therefore, our probability of a boltzmann brain forming goes from 1 all the way back down to an infinitesimally small number, right?
Plus any such object would need to form instantaneously in order to have the whole brain functioning all at once before parts freeze/die - which again is theoretically possible given infinite time, but pretty much brings the probability down to 0 in a universe which contains dark energy.
What is the void anyway? Boltzman brain sounds like a fantasy to me, and no the brain would not be living in the void
Isn't a assumption for a boltzman brain that space is finite, if space is truly infinite and time is truly infinite, then u how is the probability that's particles can form my brain 1??
Dude, I got overwhelmed within the first minute.
I would love for you to give a reaction to what the Destiny franchise calls energy types/subclasses. There are many many wild theories about if Solar is the Strong Force, Arc as the Electromagnetic, Stasis as the increase of entropy to an object or space and bringing it to a true 0°K, Void being Gravity or even Dark Energy/Matter?, and last the newest one just revealed, Strand which could possibly be a okay on string theory?…. I would love your take on what they are and the idea behind being paracasual.
I’d be really interested to hear your thoughts on their terraforming Venus video.
So a boltzman brain is solopsism + last thursdayism
The discrete nature of the Planck scale could be a result of the limitations simulation... 😂
Mild Speculation (from last video):
The whole talk about space expanding at an increasing rate confused me, because it would make more sense for its rate to decrease. What if it is not expanding at all? For it to expand it would need to expand into something. If there is something for it to expand into, then it shouldn't create new space out of nothing. What if the new space already existed? What if it was translated in the thing we think it expands into? Wouldn't we perceive it as expanding or shrinking as it translates? If this were the case, could we use the change in the expansion rate to tell us the shape of space?
A theory is the black holes singularity. Imagine our universe is nothing else than that. The „expansion“ could be nothing else than the growing mass of the black hole, while we life somewhere in the infinite mass of the singularity, not beeing able to ever escape the event horizon.
@@creatorshorizon5125
I find this topic very interesting as well as your visualization, but have a few questions and would like to better clarify where my confusion stems from.
Even if we attribute the gain in mass as an external space feeding into a region, what direction is that mass expanding into? Wouldn't it be shrinking/condensing (shrinking as in size not rate) instead of expanding if it wasn't translating in another direction? It can't occupy the same region of space unless it was condensing. I am only pointing this out to better understand how space expanding would relate in this example.
When we say the rate of expansion for space is increasing, do we also mean space is increasing in size? Maybe understanding this would help clarify my last question.
To expand on my point of confusion, I was specifically confused on how the data was interpreted. Specifically, the time delay of light? The explanations I heard on this data don't seem to clarify how this connects with the method of interpretation used on the data. It was explained in a way that made it seem as if the rate was smaller for regions of space closer to us and larger for regions farther from us. If this were the case, why wouldn't this mean the rate of expansion is increasing with distance but decreasing with time (because distance and time are different if we are using light to gather this data compared to if we measure that data by going physically to that region of space)?
Sorry for the large text, I have been trying to connect these ideas for some time.
@@JracoMeter i See, you think a lot about this stuff. I like it! (:
Well, to answer all the points you made, we would have to take a lot more into account, than just expanding or contracting space. That’s why theories like these exist, but couldn’t be proven yet, since it’s not that easy.
Just think about everything we don’t know yet. There is dark matter for example, which could influence us and the universe more than we actually think. There is also a lot in quantum physics we don’t understand yet, not to mention knowledge about space-time itself, where Einstein spend his whole life on math just to create another „theory“.
There probably are multiple answers to your questions that, based on our current knowledge, could all be correct.
Still, that’s what makes Physiks extremely interesting and mysterious. Humanity will find out eventually, but until then a very exiting time awaits us
If everything we learned is incorrect according to the Boltzmann Brain theory then the theory it self can not be correct it’s a paradox. Correct me if I’m wrong
the point is that it wouldnt matter if its a paradox or not, because if we really are the imagination of a boltzmann brain, then wether our physics are wrong or not doesnt change the fact we are still just imaginary, so the created paradox is entirely irrelevent and only exists as a paradox based on our understanding of physics, but is said understanding is just wrong, nothing would change as far as the brain is concerned
think of our dreams, we do shit in them that create paradoxs in our dreams, for example we can simultaniously need oxygen to breathe yet fly through the void of space, this is a paradox because we cant both not need and need oxygen at the same time, but our brains literally dont care about paraxoes because it doesnt exist, its not real, its all just a dream
It is not possible to simulate consciousness. Consciousness is the divine spark.
I don't really like this vision for the simulation theory that we are just simulated brains and that stuff like bacteria doesn't exists and is created when we see it as if this was like a videogame.
To me the most believable way for us to be a simulation is that the whole universe is a very complex cellular automaton be it deterministic or non, from a universe more complex than ours. We as humans ( all life in the universe for that matter) would be the evolution of self replicating patterns, not specifically designed. The speed of light would be the speed of action propagation.
I don't want to be a brain floating in the infinite void of space 😥
What about the Uncertainty Principle?
Before we can even attempt this question, we need to define what real is.
If we are simulated, it means we are based on a reality. A reality which itself has specific laws and behaviors like us. If we are based on an observer in a reality then it is impossible to not make a contradiction to that reality which we are simulated to believe we are a part of.(in short: in a non real simulation like a human imagination, contradictions and paradoxes are possible and will happen) so far we believed simulated consciousness of a reality in a simulation have not found any contradictions in the "simulation" we're in. Then So far we are in reality.
It is so if we have free will.
I don't think the idea of Boltzmann brain is right. Because there are a lot of dependent variables. For example, what's the probability of getting a six after two dice roll? The second depends on the first. If you go to infinity like what's the probability of getting a six in a row to infinity will be zero, it's impossible. Same with particles. For a particle to form some sort of structure it has to rely on another structure. This is what happened. First stars, then planets, then water, etc. But with no structure in outer space, the probability is just zero. It's like saying what's the probability of this given we have this given we have this etc. In outer space will be zero. Unless it follows the steps we already know.
However much added responsibility of which comes with the knowledge that with anything with possibility, when given enough time, becomes an inevitability.
The problem is that physicists and legal analysts haven't gotten together to decide on what decimal or fraction of a percentage defines 'of negligible risk' but then so too would follow morality. How heavy the crown of knowledge...
On the topic on 11:50: The simulations might or might not reflect the universe that the "gods" live in. If they do not, it is safe to assume that the "gods" had no interest in even living in their simulation and might not care a lot for its outcomes. That would be like asking somebody if he wanted to be Mario in the actual Super Mario games.
If we are in an simulation, who said that's the only one? Maybe we are in a test.
Like you alluded to in another video: Everything/existence is a paradox. There is nothing to understand here and yet there is. Everything happens with 100 % probability/certainty (because things are what they are) and yet it doesn't (as far as our understanding of probability is concerned).
A nothing cannot exist by definition, a something cannot be something without a nothing and nothing cannot be nothing without something from which to differentiate it.
Science cannot explain anything and yet it does.
We use logic despite nothing being logical about any of this.
would it be bad if all this were a simulation? i feel like it doesn't matter. Simulation or not we are here and have a lot to discover. And if it is simulated .... ? it is our simulated reality
but how this brain gona have thought when it isnt comected with body or someththing ,from where the energi for thought procese will come
If you throw a baby, including its brain, into space, will it suddenly create an entire universe in its mind? I think it would just die. So, why would a botzmann brain do anything differently. Doesn't a brain need to learn before it can create anything?
Hey Dylan, how can we show support for you and this channel?
Boltzmann brain doesn't matter. There's no one who can tell (or at least you don't know), whether you're in a simulation (even your brain is simulated), real Universe, Boltzmann brain or brain in a jar (world is simulated, but your brain is "real"). If they're identical, all of them is you at the "same time". That goes for parallel Universes, or even copies in this Universe, or anything else you can imagine. It doesn't matter when or where you are in this sense. All that matters (for your brain) is information your brain is experiencing. Even if you knew that you're a Boltzmann brain 100%, you still might be a Boltzmann brain in a simulation, in a jar, or on Earth being insane. It doesn't matter.
Leave it to dylan to make kuzgazat video complicated
i have a question.
lets say the theory of branching universes is real and each time i flip the coin the probability fully resets from the odds of flipping heads 100 times to the odds of 99 and 98. each time i flip heads i gradually decrease the entropy of the universe i occupy with each successful coin flip. lets say i make it to 100 heads flipped. what happens to the entropy of the universe after?
hey you should react to sciencephile the ai he makes physics related videos
Brooo react to SCIENCEPHILE AI!!!
That's just the fuckin thing. I die, and I don't know time when I'm ded as ass. BAM blink and you'll miss it! Infinity happens and I wake up somewhere else! Will I remember? Will be a human being? God knows I'm gonna wake up freash as fuck. Let's gooooooo
Can you tell me what the difference between infinity and eternity is? Infinity doesn't happen. It never ends. To say infinity happens is to say it ended at some point. When you are dead is when you will fully grasp and understand what eternity is. Its impossible for a mortal mind ( a mind bound to a mortal body ) to comprehend it.
POV: your a school project
A channel called LEMMiNO has made a pretty good documentary style video on this topic and lots other topics that i think you'd enjoy.
I THINK! THEREFORE I AM!
uBlockOrigin to block youtube ads. Needed for reaction vids.
Thought I unsubbed from this, but that was sabines channel. Soon though, I have had enough kurtzgesagt
Does it matter?
except human generations if under optimal conditions will generate brains exponentially.
a boltsmann brain is 1 assuming it cant reproduce. 1 in however long of a time it takes. and then another. and another. thats a very long time to wait for just TWO boltzman brains. you just have to wait a century for 2 brains to become 3 or 4 5 6 7 and it goes on.
to me boltzmann brains are actually not that special for a big reason. theres no context. ya you can draw a cartoon character and even give it a personality but what good is it without others and a setting and a reason and a purpose.
imo boltzmann brains are a waste of time to think about. who cares? just because the universe can simulate a brain doesnt mean it should or would. this is the problem with math were getting too exciting about possibility and probability over the facts. i mean everything we know about physics and astrophysics comes with a particular degree of uncertainty as it is. and here we stand speculating things that might as well not happen at all just because we think we have an understanding of what does happen. the anthropic principle is just the same.
the point is that in an infinate amount of time there must therefore be an infinate amount of boltzman brains, because they had an infinate amount of time to generate, whereas us humans have only had what? 3 million years? and our population didnt even grow that much until recently, afterall we expanded 6+ billion in just 150 years
while yes we expand exponentially, an infinate amount of time is still ALWAYS going to be greater than any amount of time our species has existed
@@XiaoYueMao but how long will it take for just 1 boltzmann brain? An infinite amount of time one might presume as it were. To me the amount of boltzmann brains is irellevent and frankly immaterial. What the POINT IS is theres infinite time for anything to occure in a system of increasing entropy. All im saying is..so what? Whats the big deal with that? Cool something weird finally happened after soooooooooo long nobody is even alive anymore to put it on record. Wow stunning.
I just dont care about these probability games weve invented. Move onto real science thanks
@@TheFlameGarden wether anyone would be alive after an infinate amount of time is entirely irrelevent, since it only needs to occur once for the brain to imagine everything we know as reality, it doesnt NEED anything else to be alive
@@XiaoYueMao yeah i get that.
@@XiaoYueMao How can the brain imagine anything without learning? A brain that just appears is a blank slate, yes? Without another to teach it, how can it do anything?
It's funny when people use the same arguments for the existence of God, people have a problem, but a brain in space, that's totally possible.
It's just a problem of postulating an infinite number of possibilities, and an infinite amount of time to get all those possibilities, which of course is impossible. As soon as one possibility is duplicated, you just have infinity possibilities minus 1, which is less. So you have to assume that the infinity of time is infinitely greater than just possibilities of matter and there is no reason to do that. Take a dice that has 6 faces, and a time of 6. If you ever get twice the same number, one number won't appear ever.
In reality all possibilities are bounded in certain ways, otherwise everything would be random. Just the fact that physics exists as a discipline means there are bounds, and some possibilities come back more often than others, and it is common sense as well. It's not to say there isn't a simulation, but we will never be able to prove it one way or another unless someone goes out of it, then they would perhaps know.
Also the more general way to refute those speculations is simply to say that the Universe might be a circle and all matter goes in circle as well, so not all is possible, and that's the end of those speculations. Things could move for eternity in a pattern and always the same pattern. What we consider as chance, is just part of that pattern that will reoccur eternally or not. If everything is possible that is possible too and a certainty under those same rules, so there is no simulation.
I think it is called the teapot fallacy. Two things contradict each others, so you can then prove just about anything.
You went on quite the rant about Boltzmann brains... which while incredibly interesting... has nothing to do with the subject of the video...
this triggered a dissociated episode 🤕
Eh? Can you explain? Do you mean you " feel " like nothing is " real " ? I felt that one time. It felt like nothing around me was " real ". Not my mom, who I hugged at the time because I was freaking out, not the room i was in or anything in it, and not my body either. The only thing that " felt real " was my mind. It's a very weird thing to ACTUALLY FEEL that something isn't real because something being real or not is just a concept. Not something a person can actually feel, most of the time...it that what you were talking about?
If we are simulated, wouldn't that mean that we are simulated of something else? Could be a clue to who may have created our simulation. Kinda reminds me of "god created man in his own image" so they say... lol I'm not trying to hint at anything, it's just some mental randomness.
With the amount of computing power it would take to simulate all this, you’d think they’d use it to make their own lives better. The star based computer is the worst idea ever concieved, so let’s take the example of a city computer that simulates a universe. Who does that help? Our world sucks, so why would they simulate it so poorly?? And even if they could simulate a rad ass world, still who are they doing it for? If they like uploaded people’s brains into this simulation a la The Matrix, you’d think they’d be so advanced that they could just make life awesome in real life.
Simulations theory to me sounds like philosophy gone wild. Occam’s razor says this is all a load of bullshit.
Why aren't you showing your whole face?
Are you shy, do you have a missing ear, or the other side of your face is burned out?
Be yourself and stop hiding, I think it's good advice to be more confident.
Just curious.
b.s.
What is?
@Dylan J. Dance is there any way we can contact you to ask questions? ive been pondering a bunch of science questions and i just wanted to do to get your thoughts on some of them. :)