Saul Perlmutter - Why Did Our Universe Begin?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ม.ค. 2024
- Watch more videos on cosmic beginnings: bit.ly/48x9Kcg
That the universe began seems astonishing. What brought it about? What forces were involved? How did the laws of nature generate the vast expanse of billions of galaxies of billions of stars and planets in the structures that we see today? What new physics was involved? What more must we learn?
Shop Closer To Truth merchandise like mugs and hoodies: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Get free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Saul Perlmutter is an American astrophysicist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and a Professor of Physics at the University of California, Berkeley.
For free subscriber-only exclusives, register for free today: bit.ly/3He94Ns
Closer To Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
Your videos are a great service to humanity. Thank you Dr Kuhn keep up the excellent work
Well...perhaps a service to dummies. Definitely not a service to humans...wasting money on false science...when it could go to the hungry.
but not to humans.
The universe ( entire space) will never end,,
and it never began... time will never end
and never began..
Is it so? What are your thoughts about life after death? Is it heaven or hell or reincarnation?
@@unknown9288 haha..none of those silly things..
one of the best channel, thanks !!
90 seconds into his talk and I can already tell it's never gonna go anywhere
90 seconds into this talk and i was hooked.
"Why" is not the way to start a question related to science.
"Why" is the way to start a question related to religion.
It will not get us closer to the truth.
You expected a definitive answer?
Read your message and moved on.. didn’t waste a minute
You are correct. So called "smart people" spewing nonsense.
that is all about the "how" not about the "why" ...
How is easy why is not😂.
Why is IS
@@letitsnow8518 is ...why ?
Whys are human constructions to explain our ignorance to ourselves.
@@mikemondano3624 No, are the start to overcome ignorance. Sometimes "cool" phrases makes little sense.
The video would make an excellent cartoon! In fact I'm sure Sid was based on Perlmutter.
Thanks!
…the concept by humanity of ‘time’ is the limiting factor to understand the ‘human construct’ of needing a linear answer of age…because when ‘time’ doesn’t exist as we humans perceive…then neither does the question itself, of the beginning, even exist…
🎯.. well said.
So what caused time to begin?
@@andrewdouglas1963 the word ‘time’ doesn’t exist in the concept of the universe…so that’s why there can’t be a before…and the word ‘before’ also is a non starter…that’s just us trying to determine a human answer…
@@markme3259
I never used the word "before".
It is logical that natural time began.
So it's also logical that whatever caused natural time to begin is not subject to natural time.
Wouldn't you agree?
If not, tell me what you think could cause time to begin?
And yet, I’m always late!
Seems to me they should have started time an hour or two earlier, so we wouldn’t always have to rush.
are finely tuned human beings more likely to come from value of energy selected from 10 power120, from mathematical law of nature, or from infinitesimal zero time? is it more that human observers are finely tuned by universe, or that universe is finely tuned for human beings?
Now I can't sleep tonight :) tnx
😂
Don't listen to these evasive people brother. Stick to the teaching of Jesus/Love. There have been plenty of wise men before us who figured it all out.
Primordial soup ? So where did that come from ?
Exactly. Smart man. @@patkelly931
I’m curious about the study of time during black holes and big bangs.
If there is theoretically no time before a big bang, what is time like in the milliseconds (or less of course), during inflation, etc. It seems to me we’re missing something regarding the set of rules used by the universe in these interesting moments.
What could cause time to begin?
Logically whatever caused time to begin must be eternal and unaffected by natural time.
@@andrewdouglas1963You have hit the nail on its head! Whatever was the primal cause of the universe must itself be uncaused, eternal. In vedic literature from the Indus valley civilisation, it is referred to as the Brahman (not god, not a person but just a primary entity which is the only thing that existed, exists, will exist always, ever present). The Rig Veda Nasadiya Suktha creation hymn contains philosophical musings about this topic and human beings pondered on this question thousands of years ago: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasadiya_Sukta#:~:text=The%20N%C4%81sad%C4%ABya%20S%C5%ABkta%20(after%20the,the%20origin%20of%20the%20universe.
@@user-kb8lr5ed4l
You can put forward a concept of anything.
Showing how it could work as a valid theory is a different matter.
There are no viable models of eternal universe's. All are found to require a begining.
This matches what we physically see. It strongly appears our universe had a begining.
@@user-kb8lr5ed4l
I agree. There has to be a first uncaused cause from which every other cause descended.
No start. No end. Forever is Forever..
No beginning, no end. It's Eternal.
I think if that's the case, then it has to be a loop, in which case the beginning and the end meet infinite times. The universe is expanding currently, but maybe far into the future it will contract, and the big bang is the explosion after the prior version in the loop is compacted down into and infinitesimal speck.
davidhesse6593- Nope. Real infinities are impossible. Infinities are only possible with abstract things like numbers. Universe is NOT infinite.
That´s what Aristotle would have said. To me, it is equally mind bending that is is either way, finite or infinite. But it actually makes more sense to me that it is eternal, infinite...
Absolutely not. For one thing, time did not exist before the Big Bang. And time itself will end with no further events ever taking place. Nothing can ever be eternal.
@@vladimirrogozhin7797 Not going to happen. Our ape brains are tiny and have been shrinking for 100,000 years. All that is well beyond the utmost realm of human thought, or any thought, for that matter.
could inflation happen when quantum wave function squares into Born rule energy probabilities / virtual particles? or a natural outgrowth of quantum wave function itself?
Universe is basically observing experiencing itself through us humans as well as other forms of life
Is the universe a self reflective councessnes? How can be ? If it is just a thing. Instead of a hwo, someone? A thing ( the universe)
can not have councessnes.
Brian Cox said ‘ on one knows’ and that’s it.
This is a philosophical video, obviously no one knows
one "is" @@nihlify
Thanks bro for saving my time
Would like to see more talks with Dr. Perlmutter.
Why?😅
This is such a blessing to have access to such amazing channels for free. From that perspective TH-cam is simply awesome 💞
Nothing is free. Those endless ads make you the commodity that is bought and sold.
@@mikemondano3624 Yeh, you're right. But, I listen to these videos when I am at work on my laptop on firefox with the extension "TH-cam enhancer" so..
"Why" is the wrong question, it already implies purpose. That isn't science. One doesn't presuppose. The question is "How".
So why did our universe begin?
I never heard the reason.
the choices are two A) conscious first causation B) random chance starting from something we dont know why was there.
Agree. Many segments are mistitled. Why seems to refer to intent. No one has that answer.
@@francesco5581lol. Conscious causation….😂 panpsychism is a religion.
@@dr_shrinker what is more probable, the conscious causation of an house ? The unconscious causation of an house ? Or the random chance that cause an house to exist ?
We were hoping you could tell us.
It seems no matter how far you go back along the chain of causality, at some point you are going to discover or posit something that is self-existent--something that is eternal or it is in its nature to exist. It parallels the cosmological (first-cause) argument for the existence of God.
"The chain of causality" ---what a delightful turn of phrase !
However, there are many mere mortals,have realized since forever, that all that is (from atoms to the entire universe) is/are an expression of the Creative intelligent force/energy, we call/term God.
Of course, many who find this concept difficult to understand/accept, postulate all sorts of mindless mechanical happenstances ! Let's describe these individuals as 'pseudo-intellectuals' shall we ? (All themselves without purpose, power or meaning by the way since they themselves are an intrinsic part of this/their nothingness
What an amazing set of circumstances-- all that is from nothing, all that is from nowhere, all that is without purpose. A truly fine example of intelligent reasoning !
To use the old phrase,--- "you pay your money and take your pick".
Which is your option ?
Linear thinking is always look8mg for rational answers. What if it’s all just an illusion of the mind in infinite space. No beginning or ending
@@jaylucas8352 Are you able to think 'non linearly' ? The fact that you construct your sentences in a linear fashion, suggests that you are only playing mind games !
@@user-kb8lr5ed4l You make an interesting point. However, maybe you can explain just how/why the universe exists, not to mention the power (atomic) which exists within each and every particle of matter. ???
Further, even space itself between each and every particle, planet, constellation etc etc, or why should anything exist at all ?. Since even space or that we call 'nothingness, is itself is a commodity/a dimension/a state of actual being, which is between each and particle of matter ?
It is the very existence/power (within/without ) of all that is, which confirms the very being/intelligence/power of an intelligent Creative force. That we term God.
The universe always was and always will be, it is hard for finite minds to understand this but we can if we think hard enough.
Or eat enough acid
I find this discussion quite exciting. The concepts of early inflation, dark matter and dark energy. However, I do think that a deep understanding of the big bang won't happen unless cosmologists can come up with a theory that can predict the shape of the early universe and still predict the current universe. Since we are talking about conditions that cannot be known by a mere extrapolation of current conditions and what we currently understand about time and space and matter I have some doubts over whether such a theory will ever present itself. But I do absolutely believe that the pursuit is worth trying because it enriches our understanding of the world even if the ideas are only just a further approximation to the ultimate reality (if there is such thing) and it makes things just make a little more sense. What is exciting is when predictions can be made that align with our current understanding of the universe. The knowledge that can be obtained is valuable, but I think also needs to be taken with the attitude that some of the ideas may be wrong and also that an ultimate understanding may forever elude us.
@@user-kb8lr5ed4l I like what you say. This is very interesting. In particular that we can never prove the truth of anything; we can only prove it false. This means that scientific experiments can only disprove a hypothesis. What that means is that scientific hypotheses have an element of subjectivity. What is a reasonable hypothesis to one person might be an unreasonable hypothesis to another. For this reason, a new hypothesis needs to made carefully and with the understanding that it may be wrong. It is also interesting what you say about the synthesis of mathematical knowledge with observable physical reality.
It's interestyng this video I like it
They talk about the first fraction of a second in the very early universe. But was time the same at the beginning of the universe? If you imagine a black hole, time alters drastically the closer you get to it. So in an ultimately hot dense place how can we talk about seconds and give them the same meaning as seconds here on earth?
All seconds are the same size or they would be called something else.
time, when you're standing in it, no matter how its flowing, feels like time always feels. you flow with it, so to speak.
@@ModestNeophyte Time doesn't "flow". What would be moving? Time is not ours to have, to waste, to spend. It is the god sustains us moment to moment.
@@mikemondano3624 oh my god its a damn figure of speech...
@@ModestNeophyte But... you used it like it were not. You took a "figure of speech" and then extended it to a real flow carrying you with it. Usually, that only happens when the person thinks in words and the pattern of words misleads them.
WHEN WAS THIS VIDEO RECORDED? It does not make sense to "forget" to mention this information in the video description. It's not the first time I notice that there is talk of something being investigated, or built (in this case, a telescope), and we have no way of knowing if the results are known or not. For a channel that is supposedly about science, it's a major mistake to omit any date. What if I view this in ten years from now? Is this guy still building the telescope? Probably not, so the DATE is very relevant.
I agree. Date of original broadcast should be included in the description.
Yea and he looks so young. Timetravel?
This channel is not about science but about the meaning of life.
Science gives no "why" science finds the "how".
"Why" explores reason or intent and supposes supernatural reason or intent when brought to science.
"Truth" is subjective and "fact" is objective.
"Closer to Truth" does NOT mean the same thing as "Closer to Fact".
Judge by Robert's hair.
@@ZeroOskul I don't care. A scientist talks about a telescope he is building. I need the WHEN.
Time is not linear, time is a single moment of NOW with multilayers of dimensions.
Space/distance is an illusion.
Space is a single location with universes constantly passing through one another, occasionally creating another universe.
Space is HERE.
We are HERE HERE NOW.
💥
'We' will never ever be able to explain why anything exists.
Change is necessary and fundamental. Things are essentially relational.
A beginning at a point in time can have meaning only in a relational context ( as representing a transition phase).
There cannot be an absolute point before which there was no time.
If time is defined as a measure of relative change, then in that sense, the concept of time has always been meaningful.
Unless I mistake what you mean, you misunderstand time if you say that "time has always existed." It doesn't exist at all because it's not a thing. It's a measurement of entropy occurring among things that can and do exist. Is that what you meant? But we also know that there is no elapse of time to a photon traveling at the speed of light from its own perspective. It's a massless particle, not a "thing" in that sense. Time only has meaning once it slows or stops and radiates. I trust you'll tell me if I'm wrong if you like. I'm still learning this stuff!
The universe is engaged in a cascade down an entropic gradient, at the end of which the useable energy will all have been turned into unusable energy, and it will be impossible to make a pina colada or do a jigsaw. So enjoy it while you got it!
That's right. But that still doesn't mean that time always existed. As an inseparable component of spacetime, where there is no space, there also can be no time. @@user-kb8lr5ed4l
The titles on many of these segments seem misnamed to me. Shouldn't the title be How Did Our universe Begin as opposed to Why?
They already had 1 titled "How Did Our Universe Begin". Kuhn & his producer simply rehash the same themes under different titles.
I agree. The 'how' question needs to be answered before it can be determined if the 'why' question even applies.
Both are equally valid questions that can be answered simultaneously. Genesis 2:18 @@tomjackson7755
This is to misguide us so we click to watch such clips:(
How (fluctuations) is less important then why )so one would not be alone). May I suggest the teachings of Jesus as outlined in the New Testament?
The universe or cosmo have always been here and always will be, no start and no end, just always.
Would the "how" not be easier to find an answer to ?
This guests does a good job, imo, of explaining the current state of the science in understanding how our particular part of what seems likely to be a multiverse came about. But this really doesn’t address the larger question of how is that this apparent system of exponentially expanding universes (of which ours is just one) happens to be a thing that is. Although I agree that this larger question does not seem to be a thing that we can answer. Or that if we do answer it, there will almost certainly be a next question that arises of what started the multiverse going then…Etc.
Just shut up. You have nothing of value.
I don’t think anything started the multiverse. Logic world say the multiverse is eternal and our observable universe is a spark that has infinite room to expand, along with infinite other universes in an infinite sea of bubbles.
Some bubbles expand forever, some collapse, some pop, some recycle to new universes.
Questions are not only "how" and "when" the universe began, but also IF it began in the first place. It is perfectly acceptable that the universe is infinitely old (towards the past), and the Big Bang is just one event in this infinite timeline.
Thank you! This is my belief but I rarely hear it! Most of us believe time will go infinitely into the future so why should we not assume it was infinite in the past? Infinite regression. The answer is so simple.
It's also possible that the Universe is just a small fragment, like an atom, compared to a much, much bigger structure. Our knowledge of the ultimate reality is most likely comparable to that of a bacteria found 30 km below the surface of the Earth
If the universe is infinitely old in the past, wouldn’t that have to mean that time is also travelling towards the past? (As well as travelling into the future as per our current representation of the universe)
Yes. However. The Big Bang the the Universe are One and the same.
Forget about going forward and regressing. Time is RELATIVE. @@rexreynolds9203
Nothing can only be defined relative to something. But nothingness comes first, and in the small gap between nothing and something, space and its delimiting time is drawn. Space will exist about as long as time, but when time is made unknowable by entropy a new state of nothingness will briefly (as brief as possible) reify and the whole process will start over. At least, this is how I choose to see it.
more important questions? what about planet nine?
Of course questions and the need for answers are a human construct. We may never get these answers because there might not be any answers to the questions we are seeking. Or there might not be answers we are capable of ever understanding.
What if the universe never began? And all we experience is an illusion of the mind. The cosmic mind
human imagination and umdrstanding has no bounds. if anyone went back 500 years and told the people of the day how a airplane flies they would understand it easily. just mostly no idea how to build it without help.
I think the more interesting question is why this question cannot be answered in the same way we can answer other scientific questions we have. What is different with this question from other kinds of scientific questions we have?
My 2 cts, I tell it a bit flat so again its a pointer not a total complete explanation about your question. for what its worth in the rough.
The challenge in comprehending whether the universe had a beginning lies in the inherent limitations of our human perspective. As observers, we only perceive fragments of reality, not its entirety. This is particularly true for our understanding of the universe. Our observations and measurements are confined to segments of the whole, leading to conclusions that lack a broader dimensional perspective. Our experiences, based on these partial observations, inadvertently shape our perception of the universe's complete nature.
To illustrate this concept, consider a metaphor: Imagine we are three-dimensional beings observing a two-dimensional world inhabited by flat, two-dimensional beings. We introduce a toilet roll into their world, each segment colored differently. We propose a game where they predict the color of the next segment after a certain number of rounds, based on the primary colors we've described. For these two-dimensional beings, this is a game of chance. However, from our three-dimensional vantage point, we can accurately predict the outcome of each round. What appears random and statistical in two dimensions is entirely predictable from a three-dimensional perspective.
This metaphor highlights our situation as humans. Our observations and experiences of the universe are incomplete; we perceive only parts of a much larger whole. Therefore, it's challenging to describe and solve the mysteries of the universe, as it requires a holistic approach. Unifying the complexity of the universe into a single coherent theory is a formidable task. It involves discovering a key element that harmoniously integrates all forces and aspects into one unified whole. This pursuit of unification is complex, as it demands an understanding beyond the fragments we currently perceive.
Science may only be limited to inside the universe, we have no clue how much of it applies outside and talking about the WHY the universe exists means we are talking outside of the universe.
because it require a first cause of EVERYTHING ...and this first cause can be only A) a kind of consciousness B) random chance that started we dont know why.
@@maxhagenauer24 I agree!
@@francesco5581 A first cause is something that exists without reason, I see that just as illogical as an infinite regression.
The limitation of human mind (thought) is that it divides and presents the world in terms of objects interacting in space and time. Could it be that the meaningfulness of objects is the creation of mind and subsequently the space and time are illusions. If so, we are in a dream like state, believing that the projected meaningfulness of objects is real and asking the question ‘why the world is so?’. I think, in this case, a more productive question would be ‘why are we dreaming?’.
May I recommend to read The Mirror of Simple Souls by Marguerite Porete.
No
Yet here you are. @@owdeezstrauz
🤣Love you man! Happy weekend. @@owdeezstrauz
By orders of magnitude, we are closer to the edge of the observable universe (10 to 26th), than we are to the Planck length (10 to 35th).
With cosmology, we look outward (large) at the edge of the universe for looking back in time. Inversely, looking in with QP, on (small) quantum scales, shouldn’t we see the future? Hum.
I just thought of this. I wonder if others have asked this same question. I never heard of anyone asking this….🤔
Also, why is there one observable universe when looking larger than human scales --, but uncountable atoms, quarks, Planck units when looking smaller than human scales? The numbers seem to escalate fairly quickly.
I watched a video awhile back about scales on both the grand and the infinitesimal scale. They mentioned a similar thing, that an average sized human is right around dead center in size in between the observable universe and a Planck length. What was interesting about that to me was these are the largest and smallest things we can conceive of, and we are right about in the middle. So my first thought was, what about an entity much smaller or larger than us. Are they in the middle of a similarly wide scale? Can they perceive beyond us in one direction depending on if they are larger or smaller? Is there more that will forever be beyond our perception?
@@digitalfootballer9032good question. Scales could go on forever in both directions….it seems more intuitive I think.
Because size itself is an illusion (as is extension - what we perceive as lengths and distances are just energy barriers. California is only further away because it takes more energy, gas, electricity, or whatever, to get there. It is the same distance away as everything else, zero) . In 5 dimensions or higher, size has no meaning and everything will fit inside everything else.
Hmmm
He spent the whole time explaining why we don't know. He could have just said "I don't know" and saved us a lot of time.
Where is it located 😁
I can only answer that for myself (same as everybody else). The universe started because I was born.
There is no beggining. No end. The universe and time are infinite. The big bang was just a part a of an infinite cycle. Our universe is probably one in an infinite number of universes. We are just too small to see a bigger picture of the multiverse (like at the end of The Men in Black: the best representation of the "infinity" concept to these days)
Agree. Our human brain has a hard time to understand infinity, our brain can only do what it can do, such as asking why, wanting conclusion, etc. in doing this, we digressed from accepting infinity
There's never been a "Big Bang" anywhere in the Universe.
There's only one Universe.
No "multiverses" at all.
Only one relatively simple universal dynamic, one natural and highly causal "direction".
lately ive begun to think the same thing... big bang may be the first time the universe recycled or the billionth time
mind numbing for sure...or i can be like my wife whos only concern is whether to go to kohls or bath body works
@@letitsnow8518right. But here’s a good way to think of infinity without stretching you brain to grasp it in its entirety.
Infinity could be defined as everything outside of nothingness, regardless of infinity’s size. Infinity doesn’t have to go on forever, it just means it’s boundless. It could be boundless at any size, as long as it has nothing to contain it.
Imagine two balloons that are separated by an arbitrary space. The space between the balloons are still something. But if the balloons were separated by true “nothing,” they would touch, even if the nothing were infinite. Because with nothing, space-time doesn’t exist. Now, imagine infinite number of balloons touching one another because the space between them does not exist.
So….there are somethings and nothings. We only care about the somethings. So everything that exists is all there is to exist, and it is not contained.
@@davenchopany number besides 1 or infinite times, would seem odd to me. Why would the universe do its thing only 23,000 or a billion times? If it’s infinite, it would have infinite time to expand or crunch.
The search for origins is fairly new. I'm always amazed how children experience nature without anxiety or even amazement. They look at the sun and don't see a mystery. They look at themselves the same way. They fit into the continuity of life so effortlessly. Why can't adults?
That’s because they don’t need to work, drive, pay bills, and do taxes. Hell, I’d be out catching sun too if I didn’t have to work tomorrow! 😎🤩
I don't think that's true. I can recall, at the age of 5 or 6, asking my mom how far the universe went, then completely amazed that she didn't know the answer! From that point, I wanted to know more and especially more than she or my dad did, because he was no help, either. At about that age, a big earthquake hit. Ergo, nature produced plenty of anxiety. Amazement and anxiety can occur at any age. Often, young or old, we don't talk about it enough for others to see our experience unless forced to do so. We stop talking only when we can't find answers or comfort. Then we leave it up to scientists and others, who may or may not be up to any good.
Because you want an iPhone and lights in your home.
@@dr_shrinker Precisely, hardly any responsibilities.
That's bc children are too uneducated to ask educated questions. Like many adults. E.g., let anyone try to explain what a star or a neutron star is. Most people have no clue, where to begin.
There is to wonder and there is ignorance.
"Push back our ignorance" what a great comment!
moon rise, sun go down, turn my whole world around, look up at the tiny star in the sky, tell my baby please dont cry.
travel out across the burning sand, across the ocean to some distant land, when we reach the end ,we'll all be singing ,we'll all be friends, BACK WHERE IT ALL BEGINS.....
Funny part is despite all the brilliant minds contemplating this supposed beginning no one really knows. How could they?
Funny how? 😀
Yes, we know that there's no beginning and no end.
The simple unstoppable causal process is the proof.
@@longcastle4863scary funny. Sometimes it’s best not to think about it.
Starting from zero you get a quantum fluctuation that instantly conforms to an infinite bose-einstein condensate that is continually resuming normal state, decaying from a Higgs boson that gives initial mass.
ZeroOskul • There's no "zero" in the real dynamic of the Universe, in the REALITY.
"Zero" something, a "beginning" from "zero", etc, are all just useless, unreal theoretical models made up by the human brain only.
Are Reality and what we see as the Universe (our incomplete capture of it) the same thing? Did Reality had a start? Personally i do not see Reality and the Universe as precisely the same. I see the Universe as a compartment within Reality.
Agree. Although I'd label what you call reality as Existence. Reality is a human centric construct IMO.
@@browngreen933 Yes, i use both words, i have not tot solved for my self wich one i should use, not being eng helps there ofc not. So iam exploring there, but you show an interesting point. I had the same problem with Truth. Some concepts i am exploring what label fits those concepts best. so i note your suggestion, thanks ;)
@@blijebij To me Existence is the underlying basis of what is, what has been, and what shall be for eternity. Reality is what we awaken to in this life-state and experience for a brief time before being swallowed up again by the great mystery of Existence. Just my personal opinion. Thanks!
@@browngreen933 Yes i will go seriously ponder this, it is a very good suggestion :)
@@blijebij Back to your original point, yes I can't see either how the present universe is the same thing as ultimate Existence (reality). Existence was there in some form before the present universe began and will continue after after the current universe cycle ends. IOW, the universe is a temporary manifestation of fundamental Existence which goes on forever. Not exactly the same thing. TY.
The universe was never born, thus it can never die.
The universe is full of energy. Energy can not be created or destroyed. Thus the universe cannot be created or destroyed.
Who says energy cannot be created or destroyed
misterh5 • Really?
What's "energy" in REALITY?🤔😮
@@letitsnow8518the whole science community.
Prove them wrong prove me wrong. Go ahead and create a new energy and show us.
The Monoliths's did it. "My god, it's full of stars."
Seems like asking "why" the Universe exists denotes that there is a intelligence at work. Asking "how" does not bring necessarily bring a separate intelligence into the proper scientific enquiry. But to be sure, in my life time we have learned much. I am 75 years old. In my lifetime we landed humans on the moon. Sent landers to mars. Sent craft outside our solar system. We saw many galaxies with Hubble and Webb.
I think the important question is really “Whose fault is it?”
Funny and thought provoking.
The universe is eternal. It never began because to have a beginning would mean space time didn’t exist before it did. If space time existed before the Big Bang, THAT is the true universe. On and on ad infinitum.
The universe CAN'T be infinite. All space, time, and matter began with the Big Bang. For something to exist before that, it would have to be nowhere (no space), made of nothing (no matter), never (no time). Good luck proving that.
In your totally uninformed opinion which is worthless.
@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 - You think the universe somehow existed before the Big Bang? LOL. Prove it. Go on, I'll wait.
@dr_shrinker I agree with that assessment. I like to think about a paradox that can be imagined with a simple line.
Suppose the line extends infinitely in one direction, but that the other end of the line has a definite point of termination. If you attempt to the traverse the line starting from the terminated side of the line and moving *at any speed* towards the infinitely-extended side of the line, you will never arrive at the other end of the line. HOWEVER, to do the opposite, which is to traverse the line starting at an infinite distance from the terminated side and then travel towards the final point of termination, still moving *at any speed*, you still would never arrive at the other end.
How bizarre that an infinite can be bounded on one side and yet still be infinite.
And where is your evidence??? I thought so. 😂😂
The universe did Not began....
...it always existed; maybe in a different form....
Nope. In our universe only abstractions (like numbers or sets) can be infinite. Nothing REAL is infinite.
Even if it's infinite, there is still a reason it exists, there would have to be.
Our universe began when time started.
@@ItsEverythingElse What caused time? Did anything?
@@teleamorand why is infinity only applied to nothing real and not something real?
Trying to assign logic to the ways our universe was created would mean that there was a smart designer that made it all logical to exist.
where expansion of space might happen from energy probability virtual particles producing a field like electromagnetic; inflation might happen from quantum wave function graviton producing a field?
Nope, not buying it. I'm with Penrose. No start. It just IS.
Same. CCC has its flaws, but it makes the most sense imo
Yes The Universe or something what we don't know is eternal. No beginning no end.
@@ComommonlyCensored Penrose is one of the greatest physicists that ever lived.
I agree, but then he says that freewill exists. Which I'm having none of.
OBGynKenobi- Nope, not buying your nonsense. Universe CAN'T be infinite. Real infinities are impossible.
Because God created the heavens and the earth. God is eternal and timeless, not the universe.
Who created God?
@@longcastle4863 No one / no thing That's the point. All things point and stop at God.
@@japanimated9683 That’s a logical error called, special pleading. If _a God can have always existed,_ then why not _a Universe can have always existed?_
@@longcastle4863 You say that as if it's impossible for something to be both special pleading and true at the same time.
@@japanimated9683 Well yes, otherwise who decides what is suitable for special pleading or not? I could decide 1 + 1 = 11 because I proclaim myself the lord of numbers. Who decides God has that prerogative?
Interesting conversation ... that doesn't even begin an attempt to answer the question in the caption.
Start is an ilusión
I'm completely lost in??? The question??? "WHY???" Where was it asked???
Einsteins principle, energy is neither created or destroyed. it simply changes form. so the universe has always existed. it has just changed form.
The question is, is there a why?
What was before universe, what is beyond universe, are there other universes, where the ingredients of universe came from, how space, matter and energy came into existence.
If the universe had a beginning, what was occupying the space now consumed by the universe? Where is this universe now? Is it pushing something else out of the way?
It didn’t begin. We are just dreaming
I also wonder how can it expand into all directions when there where no directions?? How can the edge of the universe move towards nothing?
I geuss there must be something outside the edge or the big bang is wrong. Maybe space itself is infinite in size and the big bang is just a bunch of matter that exploded inside this space. Instead of space only coming to existence after the big bang
Bravo , Respect and admiration to the brave scientists digging away into the unknown. There seems to be as yet unidentified fundamental forces at work. Dark matter and dark energy a huge indication. Highlighted by the incompatibilities of general relativity and quantum mechanics. . . Dream on children of science . So much awaits us.
Calculate on, measure on, hypothesize on.
Search, and you will find.
The universe is boundless, in time and in space.
Darwinian Universal, what its about?
OC
Darwinian Universal is a cosmology and physics theory that aims to provide a comprehensive explanation of the universe's origin and evolution, as well as the fundamental principles governing its behavior. This theory incorporates elements of natural selection and evolution, as well as concepts from various fields of physics, such as quantum mechanics and general relativity.
The Darwinian Universal theory posits that the universe is a dynamic and evolving system, in which structures and processes emerge and change over time in a manner analogous to biological evolution. This includes the formation of galaxies, stars, planets, and the emergence of life itself.
The theory also proposes that the fundamental constants and laws of physics may not be fixed and unchanging, but could have evolved and fine-tuned over time through a process of natural selection. This could potentially explain the apparent "fine-tuning" of the universe for life, as well as the emergence of complex structures and phenomena.
Dark energy-vacuum
- temps
-particles n molecules (reactions electron activation and making anti gravity)
-displacement (asteroid meteoroids( with thermal or kenatic energy) to make
I should be talking to Saul Perlmutter.
There are many theories on this subject. In reality, nobody really knows. And those who claim to know are taking a leap of faith.
Why did our universe begin? I have a better question: Did our universe begin? It may well have been here always. Otherwise, the best answer to the question is "Because!"
Always question we are very early in the investigation
Do you think that anybody on this Earth will know the answer..why would they be granted such a unique insight..why?
Yes, I do favors Penrose. It always is and always will be. It is an isness! However within this isness we also, in our awareness of material dimension need, even desire, to express it in terms of time.
To give Cosmologists something to accrue publish-or-perish points with. Or perhaps some kind of cosmic mutation.
Whatever made the universe at the Big Bang I probably still spewing out new space and everything just looks like it’s expanding and accelerating when really it’s just more stuff we can’t even see
Man will never know the answer to this question...let it go.
Never say never mans nature is curious of the unknown humans can't help it
They are just finding stuff in our solar system but this guy knows why it started?
Shamsi4 • No.
From "nothing" can not come anything.
Since you can see that there's something, it means that "nothing" has never existed.
Maybe less coffee before an interview. Still a great video.
It doesn't seem like he answered the question; How much energy would have been required for the initial inflation after the "Big Bang?" In other words, how much "work" was done to inflate space and time of the entire universe at an exponential rate that still staggers our minds?
It takes the knowledge of consciousness to be able to answer the question on how something can exist out of nothing. This is because consciousness can exist without a body as energy with a natural will to experience itself. The manfestation of the universe comes therefore as the result of this natural will of the premordial consciousness to experience itself.
All of physical science, including all the particles, is based ultimately on fields. So back at the time of the “big bang”, did fields exist? Were they created at the same time? Or did they come into existence first and then create particles?
So that you can come to existance and inquier truth
That was a great Woody Allen bit. I did not know he was still around. 😂
I liked it, but it never addresses the question in the headline! Was gibt?
Dark energy 🦄🧚♂️🧙♂️✨
how can we where we are in the universe look back at the big bang. then did components of our solar system travels faster than light
So many variables,variables many🤔...not getting anywhere with this??
I spied the title and thought, "This is going to be funny." --
The James Web telescope is blowing up most previous assumptions about the universe.
Why not?
Do you guys think it could of been more like a camera zooming in and that's why everything expanded?
*... could have been ...
Curious though... What do you mean? Please explain (?).
So stupid to say “could OF..”.
“Why” necessarily implies intention or purpose. That is an additional step that has no argumentative or scientific justification. Here applies the Occam’s razor principle: “The explanation that requires the fewest assumptions is usually correct. Another way of saying it is that the more assumptions you have to make, the more unlikely an explanation”.
“Why” implies intention, Which implies a consciousness, which implies an all-powerful metaphysical being. Too many unjustified assumptions and extraordinary claims, without any supporting evidence. If such evidence emerges, then that is the time to seriously consider asking why. Not before.
It must be evident by now after so many years of trying to answer this one question that perhaps science is trying to study something that is so impossibly far away that they are simply not able to find the answer because it's hidden in plain sight right in front of their eyes. Any explanation of a beginning is already the wrong answer from the human perspective.
What evidence do we have that the universe is expanding?
it takes them much too long to get things built - it has to do with money and relative importance of the ideas - even if we knew about the early universe it would not change much about today other than theoretical concepts since it will be slight degress of change not wholesale reordering - small changes can make big differences but building the devices to get to that point should be a faster process even if it is a complicated one
I wonder if dark energy and dark matter were already in an old univese and that the big bang was something that emerged and merged into it??
That's a very interesting idea I have wondered about too, that some elemental form of matter or energy from this present universe is an archaic remnant or relic of an older one.
If I threw on the floor 400 pages of writings "at once" and tell you, there is the "BOOK" So, in the beginning there is 400 pages and then you assemble the storyline in order and say that it
started from page one and on to page two......and the book had a beginning with page one....