You actually did a far greater job at presenting a science topic than most and you actually get to the point without a long drawn out explanation. Good job!
I feel that there's probably whole metrics and contexts we're still wholly unaware of that make many of our current conclusions and hypotheses about the universe incredibly premature.
newton's analogy of finding progressively shinier stones on the beach whilst the unknown vastness of the oceans lays before him is more apt@@Dora-hi2nw
I doubt there are many scientists working in these areas that think about any of the current schools of thought as definitive conclusions though, thankfully. We have to start somewhere and science is, by it's very nature, more of a journey than a destination.
The trouble is a lot of "experts" think they already know it all and run under that basis, they find something new and say "This shouldn't happen" and it obviously IS happening, at some point a lot of scientists forgot that "we don't know" is a valid answer. When you don't know something you try and find out, what happens though is people try and find things out and then their papers have to go through a whole load of experts that say "This shouldn't happen" the focus then goes onto trying to prove that the new thing is false rather than discover if its right.
You are right, but you'll never get the scientists engaging in this research to admit it. Remember these are the same scientists who held numerous almost religious views of the universe that got blown out of the water when the JWTS fired up. They are flailing and failing and they don't even know it.
This seems like a reasonable hypothesis that has been number checked and reviewed by multiple cosmologists. I think it will become part of a continuing refinement of the Hubble Constant. Thank you very much for your concise, well delivered, presentation.
I am thrilled to see you presenting and publicizing an idea that I also have thought could answer much of the questions about not only the Hubble Tension, but Dark Energy calculations as well. I am thrilled to see scientists making the calculations and quantifying the effect!
Fascinating, thank you. A 20% difference doesn’t seem like much, but it does explain very elegantly the various measurements, and underscores how remarkable these measurements are in the first place
The Cosmic Microwave Background is just the noise floor. I do not believe for a moment that this isn't cyclical. Just like a radio station raises the noise floor. If you only existed for the time that the radio station was transmitting holding a Spectrum Analyzer one would think that was the first signs of THE song. But how many songs have we already missed buried in the noise floor of the most recent big bang. It and would answer the question to why we can't see further back than the most recent CMB or why some galaxies are further away than the calculated time of the most recent CMB. But who am I to say... Edit: Horrible grammar and spelling from typing faster than I can.
There is a problem using type 1A supernovae as standard candles now, though. They explode in a range, not at an absolute, like previously thought, so that creates a huge problem now in trying to accurately measure distances and the age of the universe.
I was just referring to white dwarfs and supernovae in the context of measuring universe expansion and how its all so much harder now, seeing as how that Chandra limit has been shown to be a range instead of an absolute number.. I don't know of somewhere else where it's all discussed, but if you look up white dwarfs and the limit type 1 supernovae explode at, you should easily be able to find info about it all.
Yeah, no doubt that introduces some noise into the signal. but I think. it's pretty well understood the different. elemental signatures In the spectrum. of type 1a supernova And how the absorption lines in their spectrum. relate to the variations in brightness That aside, I would think. that they probably grade brightness on a curve. and use some. average of 1a brightness spread across the large enough sample. to cancel out any. anomalous. data. or at least. That's what I Would. do. But then again, I'm a musician, not an Astrophysicist. lol
It isn't a problem, let alone a huge one. Despite them having a range of masses now, the resulting light-curve width is directly proportional to the total mass involved in the explosion, so we can still pretty easily use them as standard candles.
the Great Attractor, the great voids, huge galaxy super clusters, etc tend to dispute the homogeneity and isotropic assumptions that the cosmological model depends on
Kind of sad that they still haven't gone far enough. For a second I thought this was finally a video about the possibility that the entire observable universe is inside a void, in fact the entire universe could be inside a void. Basically the universe didn't start with a big bang, it started with a small void in a universe that was mostly filled with matter. Imagine the entire universe as a black hole, except there is no edge, that is simply all that existed. At some point a void forms. There is no gravity in the center of that void, but there is gravity pulling at the edge of the void, and that causes the void to increase in size. As the void increases the imbalance in gravity increases, and this increase happens at a faster and faster rate. Occasionally bits of matter are left behind as parts of the edge vary slightly in speed, and there is a massive amount of heat and energy released as matter at the edge runs into other matter. Basically it would look a lot like the big bang, but it would happen far slower at first with a constantly increasing speed. The result would be a universe that is constantly expanding, not one that is expanding due to some mysterious dark energy that we have never detected that is somehow inherent to the distance between matter. It would also mean that our understanding of CMB is likely incorrect. I'm not in astronomy so I have no idea if any of the above is a possible solutions. But I also haven't been able to find anything that rules it out as a possibility.
All baryonic matter exists in Filaments between Voids. The Filaments are assumed to be bound by gravity as an attracting force, but galaxies like Hogue's Object, and the ring galaxy seen trough it, spinning the same direction, and composed entirely of young stars, seem to have been recently pushed into existence by the interaction of 2 or more expanding, non-baryonic Voids.
Dude this observation is so profound that I wonder why it hasn’t been factored in sooner. Einstein postulated that time moves slower relative to mass proximity which warps both space and time, also creating gravity. If we’re in a less dense region then our experience of time relative to denser regions would be faster and everything would also appear to be accelerating away faster than the ‘universal norm’. Bravo Einstein, Bravo… This would impact everything from how we view development stages of distant galaxies to where we look for signs of other intelligent life.
I have a duality in my thinking. First, I’m fascinated with all things space, ESPECIALLY the expansion and voids. At the same time, I also don’t understand WHY this is important to study other than curiosity. What can this knowledge offer us and how could we ever use the knowledge for anything? I have this problem with many other things too, but it really comes to mind whenever I am thinking about astronomy.
A possible local "hollow" in the center of universe reminds me of the Edgar Rice Burroughs books featuring the center-of-the-Earth land called Pellicidar with a central Sun. Burroughs didn't know there would be no gravity there, despite its residents and creatures crawling around on the outside of the inner shell.
From the standpoint of a hypothetical “infinite void”, it would not look like the universe is expanding at all. Meanwhile, from inside that universe it appears to expand at twice the speed of light. (If you start at a point, and expand at 30 mph in all directions, in an hour the sphere is 60 miles in diameter.) So its all relative
Interesting indeed, thank you, but there is one thing I don't get. I read somewhere that the milky way is part of a galaxies-supercluster, quite the opposite of a void, having I guess quite the opposite effect on the expansion rate... So: void or supercluster? Scratching my head.
Search "Vast Bubble of Galaxies Discovered - Believed To Be a Remnant From the Universe’s Inception" This can give you an idea of some of the galaxy structures in our observable universe. To that end, we're not in a "complete" void but as it said in the video, we're in an under-dense region compared to the densities of galaxies surrounding our super cluster; Andromeda perhaps nearer or farther than us to them. If you run our flow long enough, eventually we will merge with Andromeda and continue toward either a galaxy filament (a denser bulk flow) or a galaxy node (where galaxy filaments intersect). So to clarify, we are in the super cluster which itself is more or less (we being more) within a void while still slowly flowing toward "The Shapley Supercluster (which) lies very close to the direction in which the Local Group of galaxies (including our galaxy) is moving with respect to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) frame of reference." - Shapley Supercluster Wiki On a more speculative belief of my own, I think we are in a Black Hole bouncing cosmology - not exactly like some already purposed by some crackpots, but if you read about the BAO I suggested you to research, you can make two general assumptions: 1) the universe will eventually be dominated by black holes (and perhaps it all starts anew) or the so-called "dark energy" will be dominate and all will be met with "heat death of the universe." My current view leans heavily toward 1.
The vaccum is a void and devoid of anything except for vaccum energy which cannot be created or destroyed and is infinite energy ,a wind that fills the void as a second type of infinity. The void cannot be contained because it is empty space. The void cannot be created because it always exists outside of time . Time is the directional flow of matter as it cools down and evaporates. Matter and energy are the same but matter is concentrated energy transformed from vaccum energy that has mass and gravity which causes it to collapse into a singularity until the vaccum energy or wind fills the singularity and explodes transforming energy into matter that is called the big bang. As the matter begins to cool time begins but varies in speed depending on the relative localized concentrations of matter and gravitational strength and magnetism. As matter cools it expands and begins to expand in empty space and concentrated energy eventually evaporates after trillions of years and returns to the infinite eternal void as vaccum energy once again. Eventually. Time begins to run faster as matter evaporates and time ends when matter becomes infinite vaccum energy once again. Energy is conserved and shares eternity with the infinite void. Every so often being infinite energy is alot of energy. That causes big bangs and matter to happen again in infinite space forever repeatedly. Every so often vaccum energy collides with more vaccum energy and creates gravity and mass which causes it to collapse in singularities and make big bangs. But time is not present without matter flowing from hot to cold as entropy. Space is stillness. It cannot move or bend . Light is matter though . So it has mass and gravity and magnetism. Light bends around stars because of gravity bending light energy.
In the "void" the density of matter is only 20% less. That does not preclude the presence and the organisation of the matter in superclusters. It just says that per unit of volume there will be 20% FEWER superclusters, or that the superclusters will be 20% less dense (or a mixture of both).
The galaxie supercluster that you are talking about is the Local Group. It is a 3Mpc large collection of Galaxies. Now the paper suggests that the Local Group is inclosed within a Super Void with the size of 250Mpc. For reference the Milkyway is 100,000 Light years large, wich is about 30kpc. With this supervoid the galaxies would be sucked out into it. They would be way faster, then without the super void. Those extra velocites explain, why we calculate the Expansion Rate with the method of observing Galaxies at a little to high values.
I really wish articles and videos would clarify their headlines. They keep saying we are in a large supervoid, but then also say we are in a big laniakea supercluster (which is part of even bigger structures). Some say we are in between. Well, what is it? My best understanding is we are in a super cluster, but in an exterior enough position to have our backs against a supervoid area. I just think space is so massive that we really can't successfully position ourselves in a universe map. We can barely make assessments of the great attractor, though that is improving.
Has any considered all matter in the universe is accelerating towards a singularity. As all matter (and light) accelerates towards a common centre it would appear that light is being stretched (Doppler effect). It’s maybe not an expanding universe but an accelerating universe all converging towards a black hole
That's not what can be observed. There's a part of our supercluster that moves towards what is called the Great Atractor. But not all the galaxies go in that direction.
Interesting hypothesis, a local void some 70Mpsec away actually explains a few other observed anomalies with cosmic expansion, A lot more work needs to be undertaken to move this from a proposal into a substantiated theory, but it is certainly an interesting concept.
So what this is saying, is that the Hubble's constant is smaller then anticipated, right? So space is expanding slower. What implication has that for the future of the universe in terms of big crunch via big rip for instance?
Charles Hall had many claims and many anecdotes about the Tall Whites visiting Earth and his limited interactions with them. Years ago I watched an old interview with him and one of the things he said was that Earth was convenient for them because it was near to a great highway through a void to another home in a different galaxy. Their biggest ships need some form of alignment before they can make that journey and so they have havens in scientifically interesting places close to junctions around the void.
How do we classify supernovas? If we are going from their brightness, then, might it be possible that some that we have classified a certain way, might infact be a different type?
Given that velocity between objects is relative, might the Universe actually be shrinking from a fixed sphere, rather than expanding from a point? For us, the outer limits of the Universe would still appear to be ‘expanding’ away from us.
One thing I learned after being a field operator, analyst, programmer and sysadmin is that it is almost impossible for PhDs to utter the phrase, “I don’t know."
Have a question here: With these new studies, are cosmologists rethinking their beliefs in dark matter/energy? I am personally a skeptic of dark matter/energy... and feel that our observations/measurements of motion in the universe has led to poor assumptions of the physics involved. These results would appear to support my thoughts that our observations/measurements have been leading us down paths that take us away from the truth. Thanks for the great video on this.
Ok, a couple of questions. Why show a stellar mass black hole eating a star when describing supernovae? Next question, how would this explain a gravitationally bound group of galaxies like those in laniakea for example, or even our local group, not to mention the projected collision with Andromeda, and other previously formed eliptical galaxies. Are we not a part of these groups that everything else around us is? That seems unlikely, even with a matter disparity. I would think that the supercluster would have more of an influence than the void. But, like I said, I may be missing something. Just curious. I'm not cosmology genius by any measure, but I find that this somewhat conflicts with a lot of other things I've seen and read. Eh... It's probably just a sentient blood mist devouring delicious galaxies.
I don't think there ever was a beginning as in a start to the universe it just existed automatically because its not possible for nothing at all to exist. The universe most likely has consciousness in a way we do not understand as well.
I love astronomy but not to knowledge about it might be a dumb question but they say galaxies are moving away from us but isn't our galaxy moving as well but just behind the others and the ones behind us or from any direction are behind us meaning they are all moving together so we will still be able to see them?
Interesting conversation . . .what do gravitational waves add or detract from rapidly mobile matter . . . What discovery of other dimensional energy's could theoretically compleat the formula . . .
NASASpaceNews that was excellent. You say "reveals the existence of a large scale structure in the nearby universe" Can you elaborate about what this structure would be like?
How do we see back in time if things are moving away from us and why does light take so long to reach us if the universe is expanding meaning moving outward not inward
Galaxies far away are moving faster than light? Or are we moving away from those galaxies FTL? From their perspective we look like we're moving FTL, no?
At the speed of light. Space is just stretching therefore pushing the space the light is traveling in. But space itself doesn't really move that fast at all. You would have to be hundreds of billions of light years from any other matter or energy to see any real increase in expension speed.
Interesting, thanks. Perhaps cosmologists could come up with a different term than 'void' which to my mind implies a near absence of matter rather than just a 20% lower density.
I apologize, but humbly I do have suggestion that we not neglecting that for objects moving faster than light will always redshift, regardless they are nearing or receding us....🙏🙏
1934's Urantia book describes how 7 superuniverses -- the organized and inhabited part of creation -- orbit a massive gravitational centre which they portray as being of the size and in the location of the Grand Attractor. This centre functions as the heart does in a cardiovascular system only it's space and time that moves through it, not blood and oxygen. According to the authors, space breathes in 2 billion year cycles, and is just now expanding. Anyway, check it out. It was revealed to help us unite our concepts of science, philosophy and religion. For people here, you would be amazed at the scientific knowledge contained within the book. Have a look at the online text provided without embellishment by the original foundation that received the work. Remember, secondary sources are always someone else's interpretation. Be skeptical but think for yourself.
If we take measurements of all areas of how fast the expansion is taking place how come we can’t determine where this big bang took place. There must be a center point?
There is no center the big bang was not an explosion somewhere in space it was the explosive growth of spacetime and therefore happened literally everywhere
This could in a way explain the so called Hubble tension, you right. But where this void come from, is there anything like perfect void possible in the Universe? I have my doubts.
That would be the next step (I guess not done yet). They presented a possible solution for the problem, which also gives predictions what we would find, if the hypothesis would be true. And then you can check the existing data (sometimes re-assessment under different boundary conditions can bring up new information) or decide how and where to have a closer look.
We don't know because we don't understand what influence Dark Energy or Matter has on visible matter, even with the help of simulations, theories, observations etc.
Our region of space is what we can measure. So, they discovered the rest of the universe is 20% more dense that our little "void". Specifics matter. In other news, jwst just discovered that there are way more galaxies than we thought and they're up to 100 times more massive than we thought. Can we start putting "dark matter" to rest now? I think we found it
Maybe the universe is just moving like how planets around a sun or solar systems around a galaxy now galaxies within the universe maybe even universes in a multi verse
You actually did a far greater job at presenting a science topic than most and you actually get to the point without a long drawn out explanation. Good job!
Well put
Right on. Everything has to do with numbers.
Agreed. Thank you!
These numbers are fake cuz space is a scifi movie, buncha fairy tale talk and yall eat it up like dummies
agreed. maybe i'm stupid but Pbs space time messes my brain up badly right now haha
I feel that there's probably whole metrics and contexts we're still wholly unaware of that make many of our current conclusions and hypotheses about the universe incredibly premature.
I agree completely I don't think we even know what we should be asking much less the answers but we gotta keep trying
newton's analogy of finding progressively shinier stones on the beach whilst the unknown vastness of the oceans lays before him is more apt@@Dora-hi2nw
I doubt there are many scientists working in these areas that think about any of the current schools of thought as definitive conclusions though, thankfully. We have to start somewhere and science is, by it's very nature, more of a journey than a destination.
The trouble is a lot of "experts" think they already know it all and run under that basis, they find something new and say "This shouldn't happen" and it obviously IS happening, at some point a lot of scientists forgot that "we don't know" is a valid answer. When you don't know something you try and find out, what happens though is people try and find things out and then their papers have to go through a whole load of experts that say "This shouldn't happen" the focus then goes onto trying to prove that the new thing is false rather than discover if its right.
You are right, but you'll never get the scientists engaging in this research to admit it. Remember these are the same scientists who held numerous almost religious views of the universe that got blown out of the water when the JWTS fired up. They are flailing and failing and they don't even know it.
This seems like a reasonable hypothesis that has been number checked and reviewed by multiple cosmologists. I think it will become part of a continuing refinement of the Hubble Constant.
Thank you very much for your concise, well delivered, presentation.
The complexities of measuring things in the mind bogglingly large universe is astounding.
Say it again
Here's a ruler for you.
And here's a ruler for you.
Why does mine only have 11 and the others have 12 ?
Don't worry about it.
Nah, its just a load more zeros on the end, take off the zeros and its basic math, can add the zeros after.
I am thrilled to see you presenting and publicizing an idea that I also have thought could answer much of the questions about not only the Hubble Tension, but Dark Energy calculations as well. I am thrilled to see scientists making the calculations and quantifying the effect!
I'm so happy to be able to watch such marvelous videos from you guys.Keep up the good work.Thank you.Honestly.
Fascinating, thank you. A 20% difference doesn’t seem like much, but it does explain very elegantly the various measurements, and underscores how remarkable these measurements are in the first place
The Cosmic Microwave Background is just the noise floor. I do not believe for a moment that this isn't cyclical. Just like a radio station raises the noise floor. If you only existed for the time that the radio station was transmitting holding a Spectrum Analyzer one would think that was the first signs of THE song. But how many songs have we already missed buried in the noise floor of the most recent big bang. It and would answer the question to why we can't see further back than the most recent CMB or why some galaxies are further away than the calculated time of the most recent CMB. But who am I to say...
Edit: Horrible grammar and spelling from typing faster than I can.
Gotta love JWST. It's given scientist permission to contemplate explanations that were once considered taboo. Hellenic science is alive and well.
There is a problem using type 1A supernovae as standard candles now, though. They explode in a range, not at an absolute, like previously thought, so that creates a huge problem now in trying to accurately measure distances and the age of the universe.
Is there a topic under which these problems are discussed? (Every star may still be little too much different from any other star/white dwarf)
I was just referring to white dwarfs and supernovae in the context of measuring universe expansion and how its all so much harder now, seeing as how that Chandra limit has been shown to be a range instead of an absolute number.. I don't know of somewhere else where it's all discussed, but if you look up white dwarfs and the limit type 1 supernovae explode at, you should easily be able to find info about it all.
Yeah, no doubt that introduces some noise into the signal. but I think. it's pretty well understood the different. elemental signatures In the spectrum. of type 1a supernova And how the absorption lines in their spectrum. relate to the variations in brightness That aside, I would think. that they probably grade brightness on a curve. and use some. average of 1a brightness spread across the large enough sample. to cancel out any. anomalous. data. or at least. That's what I Would. do. But then again, I'm a musician, not an Astrophysicist. lol
It isn't a problem, let alone a huge one. Despite them having a range of masses now, the resulting light-curve width is directly proportional to the total mass involved in the explosion, so we can still pretty easily use them as standard candles.
@SolidSiren LOL I really hope so or else pearlmutter would have to give back his Nobel prize heheh
This video gave me several different directions to go in to search for more information. Thank you..
the Great Attractor, the great voids, huge galaxy super clusters, etc tend to dispute the homogeneity and isotropic assumptions that the cosmological model depends on
Awesome. Still makes me feel some profound wonder with a side of dread
Kind of sad that they still haven't gone far enough. For a second I thought this was finally a video about the possibility that the entire observable universe is inside a void, in fact the entire universe could be inside a void. Basically the universe didn't start with a big bang, it started with a small void in a universe that was mostly filled with matter. Imagine the entire universe as a black hole, except there is no edge, that is simply all that existed. At some point a void forms. There is no gravity in the center of that void, but there is gravity pulling at the edge of the void, and that causes the void to increase in size. As the void increases the imbalance in gravity increases, and this increase happens at a faster and faster rate. Occasionally bits of matter are left behind as parts of the edge vary slightly in speed, and there is a massive amount of heat and energy released as matter at the edge runs into other matter. Basically it would look a lot like the big bang, but it would happen far slower at first with a constantly increasing speed. The result would be a universe that is constantly expanding, not one that is expanding due to some mysterious dark energy that we have never detected that is somehow inherent to the distance between matter. It would also mean that our understanding of CMB is likely incorrect.
I'm not in astronomy so I have no idea if any of the above is a possible solutions. But I also haven't been able to find anything that rules it out as a possibility.
All baryonic matter exists in Filaments between Voids. The Filaments are assumed to be bound by gravity as an attracting force, but galaxies like Hogue's Object, and the ring galaxy seen trough it, spinning the same direction, and composed entirely of young stars, seem to have been recently pushed into existence by the interaction of 2 or more expanding, non-baryonic Voids.
no wonder!!! thank you for the detailed explanations.
The real void is in our understanding.
Dude this observation is so profound that I wonder why it hasn’t been factored in sooner. Einstein postulated that time moves slower relative to mass proximity which warps both space and time, also creating gravity. If we’re in a less dense region then our experience of time relative to denser regions would be faster and everything would also appear to be accelerating away faster than the ‘universal norm’. Bravo Einstein, Bravo… This would impact everything from how we view development stages of distant galaxies to where we look for signs of other intelligent life.
Being in a void makes perfect sense. A bit like Osmosis or Diffusion.
That was very interesting. Much appreciated!
I have a duality in my thinking. First, I’m fascinated with all things space, ESPECIALLY the expansion and voids. At the same time, I also don’t understand WHY this is important to study other than curiosity. What can this knowledge offer us and how could we ever use the knowledge for anything? I have this problem with many other things too, but it really comes to mind whenever I am thinking about astronomy.
A possible local "hollow" in the center of universe reminds me of the Edgar Rice Burroughs books featuring the center-of-the-Earth land called Pellicidar with a central Sun. Burroughs didn't know there would be no gravity there, despite its residents and creatures crawling around on the outside of the inner shell.
Where in the void is the structure and will the voyage crafts be able to capture it
In my humble opinion; The Big Bang was a local event in a much larger and older, preexisting universe.
I think so as well.
From the standpoint of a hypothetical “infinite void”, it would not look like the universe is expanding at all. Meanwhile, from inside that universe it appears to expand at twice the speed of light. (If you start at a point, and expand at 30 mph in all directions, in an hour the sphere is 60 miles in diameter.) So its all relative
Relative to infinity?
Interesting indeed, thank you, but there is one thing I don't get. I read somewhere that the milky way is part of a galaxies-supercluster, quite the opposite of a void, having I guess quite the opposite effect on the expansion rate... So: void or supercluster? Scratching my head.
Search "Vast Bubble of Galaxies Discovered - Believed To Be a Remnant From the Universe’s Inception" This can give you an idea of some of the galaxy structures in our observable universe. To that end, we're not in a "complete" void but as it said in the video, we're in an under-dense region compared to the densities of galaxies surrounding our super cluster; Andromeda perhaps nearer or farther than us to them. If you run our flow long enough, eventually we will merge with Andromeda and continue toward either a galaxy filament (a denser bulk flow) or a galaxy node (where galaxy filaments intersect). So to clarify, we are in the super cluster which itself is more or less (we being more) within a void while still slowly flowing toward "The Shapley Supercluster (which) lies very close to the direction in which the Local Group of galaxies (including our galaxy) is moving with respect to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) frame of reference." - Shapley Supercluster Wiki
On a more speculative belief of my own, I think we are in a Black Hole bouncing cosmology - not exactly like some already purposed by some crackpots, but if you read about the BAO I suggested you to research, you can make two general assumptions: 1) the universe will eventually be dominated by black holes (and perhaps it all starts anew) or the so-called "dark energy" will be dominate and all will be met with "heat death of the universe." My current view leans heavily toward 1.
The vaccum is a void and devoid of anything except for vaccum energy which cannot be created or destroyed and is infinite energy ,a wind that fills the void as a second type of infinity. The void cannot be contained because it is empty space. The void cannot be created because it always exists outside of time . Time is the directional flow of matter as it cools down and evaporates. Matter and energy are the same but matter is concentrated energy transformed from vaccum energy that has mass and gravity which causes it to collapse into a singularity until the vaccum energy or wind fills the singularity and explodes transforming energy into matter that is called the big bang. As the matter begins to cool time begins but varies in speed depending on the relative localized concentrations of matter and gravitational strength and magnetism. As matter cools it expands and begins to expand in empty space and concentrated energy eventually evaporates after trillions of years and returns to the infinite eternal void as vaccum energy once again. Eventually. Time begins to run faster as matter evaporates and time ends when matter becomes infinite vaccum energy once again. Energy is conserved and shares eternity with the infinite void. Every so often being infinite energy is alot of energy. That causes big bangs and matter to happen again in infinite space forever repeatedly. Every so often vaccum energy collides with more vaccum energy and creates gravity and mass which causes it to collapse in singularities and make big bangs. But time is not present without matter flowing from hot to cold as entropy. Space is stillness. It cannot move or bend . Light is matter though . So it has mass and gravity and magnetism. Light bends around stars because of gravity bending light energy.
They are thousands or even millions of light years away from each other so kind of both
In the "void" the density of matter is only 20% less. That does not preclude the presence and the organisation of the matter in superclusters. It just says that per unit of volume there will be 20% FEWER superclusters, or that the superclusters will be 20% less dense (or a mixture of both).
The galaxie supercluster that you are talking about is the Local Group. It is a 3Mpc large collection of Galaxies. Now the paper suggests that the Local Group is inclosed within a Super Void with the size of 250Mpc. For reference the Milkyway is 100,000 Light years large, wich is about 30kpc. With this supervoid the galaxies would be sucked out into it. They would be way faster, then without the super void. Those extra velocites explain, why we calculate the Expansion Rate with the method of observing Galaxies at a little to high values.
I really wish articles and videos would clarify their headlines. They keep saying we are in a large supervoid, but then also say we are in a big laniakea supercluster (which is part of even bigger structures). Some say we are in between. Well, what is it? My best understanding is we are in a super cluster, but in an exterior enough position to have our backs against a supervoid area. I just think space is so massive that we really can't successfully position ourselves in a universe map. We can barely make assessments of the great attractor, though that is improving.
If the universe is expanding you should be able to see the same star at different distances depending in what time you are looking at it
Measurements to that level of precision have yet to be conceived of, and/or invented yet.
As I understand. Or have been informed.
Has any considered all matter in the universe is accelerating towards a singularity. As all matter (and light) accelerates towards a common centre it would appear that light is being stretched (Doppler effect). It’s maybe not an expanding universe but an accelerating universe all converging towards a black hole
That's not what can be observed. There's a part of our supercluster that moves towards what is called the Great Atractor. But not all the galaxies go in that direction.
I’m definitely gonna have to look into bulk flow.
Excellent work ❤
How fast is the time particle moving?
Interesting hypothesis, a local void some 70Mpsec away actually explains a few other observed anomalies with cosmic expansion,
A lot more work needs to be undertaken to move this from a proposal into a substantiated theory, but it is certainly an interesting concept.
that we are actually of the universe and have so much of a hard time trying to understand it is just insane!
I'm in a brain, and those things are impossible to understand.
What is the name/artist of the background music?
What's the source of the plots you use to describe the "pantheon sample"?
So what this is saying, is that the Hubble's constant is smaller then anticipated, right? So space is expanding slower. What implication has that for the future of the universe in terms of big crunch via big rip for instance?
I do believe that by looking at and studying Webbs images, will help us in technological advancement.
Potential in this , makes sence.
with that said i did enjoy your content.
There's some negative comments here, but you keep presenting valid hypothesis
Charles Hall had many claims and many anecdotes about the Tall Whites visiting Earth and his limited interactions with them. Years ago I watched an old interview with him and one of the things he said was that Earth was convenient for them because it was near to a great highway through a void to another home in a different galaxy. Their biggest ships need some form of alignment before they can make that journey and so they have havens in scientifically interesting places close to junctions around the void.
Something similar to Boötes Void. Voids are where the dark matter sits.
It could be voids in between the galaxies or it could also be time? Or black matter? Could they all the same thing??
Hi. Where can I get the paper? Thank you
How do we know that space time itself does not warp the time it takes light to reach us?
Because you always have enough time to eat breakfast before going to work. Just have to wake up early enough to do so. 😮 Straight lines
20% makes that big a difference. That is pretty interesting.
How do we classify supernovas?
If we are going from their brightness, then, might it be possible that some that we have classified a certain way, might infact be a different type?
I’m very thank universal I got more understanding
This is awesome
Given that velocity between objects is relative, might the Universe actually be shrinking from a fixed sphere, rather than expanding from a point? For us, the outer limits of the Universe would still appear to be ‘expanding’ away from us.
One thing I learned after being a field operator, analyst, programmer and sysadmin is that it is almost impossible for PhDs to utter the phrase, “I don’t know."
1:23 Just because something is farther away doesn't mean that it is moving faster.
Is that "bulk flow" the same as the so called "dark flow"?
Very interresting
Have a question here:
With these new studies, are cosmologists rethinking their beliefs in dark matter/energy?
I am personally a skeptic of dark matter/energy... and feel that our observations/measurements of motion in the universe has led to poor assumptions of the physics involved. These results would appear to support my thoughts that our observations/measurements have been leading us down paths that take us away from the truth.
Thanks for the great video on this.
Dark matter and energy is the name of the problem, not the solution
what exactly is the "largest scale" ?
Funny, I made a comment about exactly this on another channel, asking the question if this was possible. Thanks for explaining.
Ok, a couple of questions. Why show a stellar mass black hole eating a star when describing supernovae?
Next question, how would this explain a gravitationally bound group of galaxies like those in laniakea for example, or even our local group, not to mention the projected collision with Andromeda, and other previously formed eliptical galaxies. Are we not a part of these groups that everything else around us is? That seems unlikely, even with a matter disparity. I would think that the supercluster would have more of an influence than the void. But, like I said, I may be missing something. Just curious.
I'm not cosmology genius by any measure, but I find that this somewhat conflicts with a lot of other things I've seen and read.
Eh... It's probably just a sentient blood mist devouring delicious galaxies.
I don't think there ever was a beginning as in a start to the universe it just existed automatically because its not possible for nothing at all to exist. The universe most likely has consciousness in a way we do not understand as well.
I love astronomy but not to knowledge about it might be a dumb question but they say galaxies are moving away from us but isn't our galaxy moving as well but just behind the others and the ones behind us or from any direction are behind us meaning they are all moving together so we will still be able to see them?
Interesting conversation . . .what do gravitational waves add or detract from rapidly mobile matter . . .
What discovery of other dimensional energy's could theoretically compleat the formula . . .
Sounds like the whole conundrum has been wrapped up in a neat package. Hopefully there are no loose ends.
Nice work
NASASpaceNews that was excellent. You say "reveals the existence of a large scale structure in the nearby universe" Can you elaborate about what this structure would be like?
I think this was referring to the void itself. This also puzzled me, as I think a void is more of a "lack of" nearby structure
The large scale structure that is talked about, is the Super Void that is about 250Mpc large and incloses the Local Group that is about 3Mpc large.
I like the accurate Latin pronunciation of novae.
How do we see back in time if things are moving away from us and why does light take so long to reach us if the universe is expanding meaning moving outward not inward
What the human mind is capable of!
What is a super novi?
these scientists should have asked me about this a long time ago. I've been living in a low gravity local void all my life.
Would being in this void make the creation of life more likely?. Is it possible that we are in this void because if we werent...we wouldnt be at all?
We are in a computer that projects gravity so there will be a difference in matter at different locations.
Damn, that picture of the thumbnail is strikingly similar to our own situation.
Galaxies far away are moving faster than light? Or are we moving away from those galaxies FTL? From their perspective we look like we're moving FTL, no?
At the speed of light. Space is just stretching therefore pushing the space the light is traveling in. But space itself doesn't really move that fast at all. You would have to be hundreds of billions of light years from any other matter or energy to see any real increase in expension speed.
8:04 The Boötes void, WOE, woah, woah.
Sorry - either I probabplx missed it or did not find the scientific sources / papers for reference? What is the source of your assumptions?
Interesting, thanks. Perhaps cosmologists could come up with a different term than 'void' which to my mind implies a near absence of matter rather than just a 20% lower density.
You must have a very happy and balanced life to motivate you to formulate witless insults to random people on the internet.@cwc6632
@cwc6632wdym?
I apologize, but humbly I do have suggestion that we not neglecting that for objects moving faster than light will always redshift, regardless they are nearing or receding us....🙏🙏
1934's Urantia book describes how 7 superuniverses -- the organized and inhabited part of creation -- orbit a massive gravitational centre which they portray as being of the size and in the location of the Grand Attractor. This centre functions as the heart does in a cardiovascular system only it's space and time that moves through it, not blood and oxygen.
According to the authors, space breathes in 2 billion year cycles, and is just now expanding.
Anyway, check it out. It was revealed to help us unite our concepts of science, philosophy and religion. For people here, you would be amazed at the scientific knowledge contained within the book.
Have a look at the online text provided without embellishment by the original foundation that received the work. Remember, secondary sources are always someone else's interpretation. Be skeptical but think for yourself.
Yes it's called the firmament
Shoes / chips 0:25
If we take measurements of all areas of how fast the expansion is taking place how come we can’t determine where this big bang took place. There must be a center point?
Nope. Everywhere is the center. Everything aka space just got...stretched before matter began to form.
There is no center the big bang was not an explosion somewhere in space it was the explosive growth of spacetime and therefore happened literally everywhere
@@gmork1090 that makes as much sense as the earth is flat!!!
This could in a way explain the so called Hubble tension, you right. But where this void come from, is there anything like perfect void possible in the Universe? I have my doubts.
Doesn't need to be perfect just slightly lower in density than. the surrounding universe
If we lived inside a void, a giant and irregular void, could any sign of anisotropy be detected in the observations of radiation coming from without?
That would be the next step (I guess not done yet). They presented a possible solution for the problem, which also gives predictions what we would find, if the hypothesis would be true. And then you can check the existing data (sometimes re-assessment under different boundary conditions can bring up new information) or decide how and where to have a closer look.
We live in void section of the universe, so void that an another galxy will colide us in billions years. ^^
Sorry if bad English, I'm French.
5:34 Nice.
end of space is like a window . and dark out side. its an optical illusion of an infinite mirror
The Universe is expanding, but the Great Attractor is Pulling & guess what, the Great Attractor is winning.
Imagine watching this video and being like , yeah, I knew all this already.
Why is it assumed that space is expanding, rather than space exists as a bulk fact and we are moving within it?
case closed? or are there observations which oppose this interpretation?
Ok, but what does Sabine Hossenfelder say about it?
The void & blck abyss is called gunungaagap in Norse myth
Well, what's causing the expansion? Where is all this extra space is coming from?
We don't know because we don't understand what influence Dark Energy or Matter has on visible matter, even with the help of simulations, theories, observations etc.
The grounding fact is, we have many ideas and theories but at the end we simply do not know yet.
Our region of space is what we can measure. So, they discovered the rest of the universe is 20% more dense that our little "void". Specifics matter.
In other news, jwst just discovered that there are way more galaxies than we thought and they're up to 100 times more massive than we thought.
Can we start putting "dark matter" to rest now? I think we found it
Very good video....now let's get down on dark matter and energy 🎉
Maybe the universe is just moving like how planets around a sun or solar systems around a galaxy now galaxies within the universe maybe even universes in a multi verse
Sounds like an easy excuse to use in order to stand on old data rather than reevaluating things.