Did Dark Energy Just Disappear? | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 тра 2024
- Did all of dark energy just vanish? A team of scientists have just analyzed new data and claim that we need to completely rethink its existence. This episode is supported by The Great Courses Plus. Go to ow.ly/EMoC304OIsh to start your free one month trial.
Get your own Space Time tshirt at bit.ly/1QlzoBi
Tweet at us! @pbsspacetime
Facebook: pbsspacetime
Email us! pbsspacetime [at] gmail [dot] com
Comment on Reddit: / pbsspacetime
Support us on Patreon! / pbsspacetime
Help translate our videos! ua-cam.com/users/timedtext_cs_p...
Why are we talking about dark energy again? Because another team has just announced a new analysis of updated supernova data. They claim that the data are consistent with there being NO dark energy - no accelerating expansion. They suggest that the universe may just be expanding at a constant rate - never speeding up, but also not slowing down. In this episode, Matt discusses this controversial claim, and whether or not we should throw away nearly twenty years of work on dark energy.
Links to Sources
Marginal Evidence for Cosmic Acceleration from Type Ia Supernovae
J. T. Nielsen, A. Guffanti & S. Sarkar (2016)
www.nature.com/articles/srep35596
Statistical hypothesis testing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statist...
Wolfram error analysis tutorial
reference.wolfram.com/applica...
Previous Space Time Episode
• Quantum Vortices and S...
Written and hosted by Matt O’Dowd
Produced by Rusty Ward
Graphics by Grayson Blackmon
Made by Kornhaber Brown (www.kornhaberbrown.com)
Comments Answered by Matt
ThunderboltTangerine
• The Many Worlds of the...
QED
• The First Humans on Mars
Teboski78
• The First Humans on Mars
There is so much trash content on UA-cam these days - the trending page is almost a joke. So glad that videos like this exist
No way it’s her, she’s come a long way lol.
Wow, relax girl ;)
Ey, there is a easy solution to this!
Ignore the trending page. I'm doing it since it's inception and neither have I bullshit recommends nor do I have to see all the different faces "creating" the same "content"
Good thing team us are superior to the bad other who are wrong.
@@DanielNyong who's she?
Research shows research needs further research.
Conor OConnor - Look into Cognitive Bias. Very important.
We should _all_ be mandatorily learning about it in grade 7.
Especially, Science, politicians, lawyers & _Law enforcement officials_ & military personal!
Your welcome for your next rabbit hole adventure. *Hugz
Discoveries create more questions create more research create more discoveries. All claims require evidence all evidence must be testable and repeatable. All assertions are only based in known discoveries not unknown undiscovered untested realities. Therefore, all research is infinitely constant.
I don't know this.
epic
search again.
A rare UA-cam science video that is both clear, and doesn't talk down to us, but instead trusts the audience to have the Intelligence to figure out the topic at hand. Just what I want.
+PBSSpaceTime it is incredible that you are able to boil down and explain complex cosmological topics in a way a layman can understand. What's more incredible is that you don't need crazy CGI, but actually go into some detail about the theoretical equations and scientific experiments that support those conclusions without dumbing down the actual information. Please do not stop making this content.
VPSantiago Completely agree! 👍
There is a saying: If you can't explain it in a way a barmaid can understand, you don't understand it yourself.
Who writes the script for these? I imagine a team, but are they contracted out for this kind of work vs. being employed full time by PBS?
Did you just call me a layman?
Both well done and currently accurate as to the latest information.
I understood this video with minus 5 sigma confidence
Prabh Chahal 😂😂😂
Prabh Chahal I read your comment and was thinking WTF? Then that part in the video arrived and I could not stop laughing. 🤔
Prabh Chahal I seriously LOL'd.
lool 😂😉😂
Then you know nothing about statistics.
The fact that you can see interference just with your fingers just blew my mind! Thank you for that. I'm going to have to share that with people and then have them not care and think and I'm crazy
"Of course the media jumped all over this and provided almost no useful info"
LMAO
@Things I Like Journalist studies are only political and semi-religious brainwash (read about the Mouseland metaphore at Wikipedia) . So what do you expect? There is zero science training in journalist education .
@@KibyNykraft Unfortunately these people also have the most control over public opinion.
If there’s no info, how is the media going to provide it?
@@KibyNykraft well, that's because journalists are not scientists?
@@melgross bullshitting around like... most (not all) do?
Q: "Doctor, I'm seeing dark vertical lines."
A: "You may have watched too much PBS Space Time."
This is wonderful! I recently had a discussion with my nephew... he told me that science isn't always right, that science can be wrong. He's right, but it seemed to be an excuse to disregard science, so I responded, "That's true, but what do you use to disprove it?"
He got kind of quiet, then muttered, "...science."
Then we had a chat about how science is a process, a tool rather than a thing of its own. We talked about evidence, and how new ideas are welcome. I'm hoping it was a positive thing.
Laynie Fingers truth. When science is wrong, its usually wrong, because of more science. Its a process.
Amin That sounds like sudo science.... where did you get this figure from, hardly scientific... light and atoms are pretty well understood, so is how gravity works.... Theories can be tested, which gives us confidence... Guess work and saying it is all just theories is not very helpful to an inquisitive young mind.
Amin you're clearly too ignorant to even understand it if it was explained to you.
Amin same to you hun
Amin you didn't say please....
That finger slit experiment! Totally seen those bands before but never thought it was the same as the slit experiments! Super cool
Same here!!
i used to get pissed off that i couldnt cast a solid shadow puppet with a flash light if i was too close to it.... little did i know that same behavior, extrapolated, shows us so much about the world/universe. yay human curiosity!
I've watched this whole Dark Energy playlist several times and I always love it.
Another thing that occurs to me - if dark energy speeds expansion up and gravity/energy/matter slow expansion down, doesn't a constant expansion speed imply _some_ dark energy - enough to counteract the gravity side of the equation at least?
Not a physicist here. I think constant expansion at a constant rate might not imply dark energy because it would technically be the initial expansion force expanding the verse. Thats why people thought the universe expanding would slow down as the force just kinda peters out, and even keeping its initial expansion rate would be... understandable but expanding at an ACCELERATING RATE?An expanding universe at an accelerating rate implies something is adding to that outward push.
I have to say, this video is among the crowning jewels of PBS spacetime stuff, purely from the perspective of of the quality of analysis and explanation. Great stuff
Flatearthers: Earths flat
Scientists: Universe is flat
Who do I even trust anymore
This great!
Even my residence is a flat!
It’s definitely a gross oversimplification and misleading to say the universe is flat. From the macro -> the micro (from the large to the small), literally nothing in this universe is truly "flat". Not even the thinnest, lightest sheet of paper is flat. We live in a multi dimensional universe where that is meaningless and a PHYSICAL impossibility.
Cian McCabe Good question. However, Membrane Theory/M-Theory aka Superstring Theory still exists within the multi-dimensional space-time continuum that is itself formed & sustained by the omnipresent quantum "vacuum" field of energy fluctuations, as described by Quantum Mechanics. String Theory still requires our universe- to the best of our current scientific understanding-to exist as a multi-dimensional manifold... again making "flat" or "flatness" an absolute impossibility.
Kids: I’m going to die if you don’t give me another cookie
Doctor: that kid is going to get fat and die if you let them eat all the cookies they want
The cookies are flat.
who to trust...
Man, this guy’s videos are waaay above my physics understanding, I’m sad I can’t fully enjoy them
Love your videos, I just discovered them. Keep up the excellent work SpaceTime! :)
Not smart enough for this series but I watch them all anyways.
the best for to sleep fast at night..
Matt, you are extremely talented. So is the team behind you: Rusty, Grayson and Brown.
Really enjoy othe content you produce. Appreciate it.
Othe content...
Othe content…
@@ginabrogan1825 ..and? What are you trying to achieve? At least I spread some positivity. The same can't be said for you?
Finally being able to visualize effects make them so much more graspable and intuitive. Thank you!
I feel like I need to hear this from Susskind - his insight into inflation is next level
Please do a video on the new article by Verlinde!
This! A thousand times this!
what is Verlinde?
Vaibhav Gupta wanna know too
Vaibhav Gupta Recently dutch physicist published a paper claiming that he found a modified version of gravity that would make dark energy as well as dark matter obsolete. And well the internet is going nuts about it
Markus Wiener "the internet is going nuts about it"
if internet is going nuts then i have my answer.
Can you do a video on the pilot wave theory?
That's a good one.
Yarrrrrrr ye be livin' in bilgewater
Also why is it explicitly non-local and what causes that?
watch veritaserum video about it
I watched it. I still don't get the differences between the interpretations of QM.
Watching through this playlist has been such an emotional roller coaster 🎢
Me too 😊
I have just finished watching almost the entire video library on PBS Space Time. My head hurts, but in a very good way. I want to thank you guys for the amazing work you do. That doesn't mean I understand almost ANY of what I've just watched. The part that I love is that my mind has been challenged, and for that, I thank you.
(Advil time.)
Whoa! That "two fingers in front of your eye" thing... it works. I've done that before, and I've noticed the bands, but I always figured that had to do with my eye having trouble focusing at that distance.
Yeah, I'm in the same boat. I've seen it before but I thought that was simply my finger I was seeing since eyes can't focus on something that close.
Are we sure we are doing it correctly? Should we only be seeing the dark bands near our fingers?
The757packerfan I think so.
Yes. The bands tend to become less pronounced the more they are distant from the surface/finger.
Kind of strange isn't it. Have you tried it with one finger. It is fainter and more difficult to see but still works.
Keep in mind wave behaviour, and it is easier to understand. Even with just the one finger.
I understand literally zero about the video but I still watch it for some reason
I love these videos so much. I hope students today know how lucky they are to have access to this. I know I am and I haven't been in school any time recently.
Love this guy! He really has a great way of explaining stuff. Having had physics and higher math helps though.
I just did the finger eye experiment and freaked out so hard
IKR. how did I not know this one?
I would freak out too if I had a eye on my finger.
Same here!
you should perform the experiment with extreme caution
What is it ?
So I don't know if you were planning on covering this but I'd love to see discussion of magnetic monopoles, in terms of whether or not they exist outside of mathematics, what the implications (in terms of physics and how it might change technology) of monopoles existing or not existing would be. I'd also love it if you could cover the concept of magmatter or monopolium or whichever term people want to use for it, and all that.
The trick with the fingers is really neat, never knew that :)
I believe a team with one of the original authors recently published a new paper on this subject in October 2019. Dr. Sabine Hossenfeld discusses this issue in a brand new video as of early December 2019.
Hey, talk emergent gravity and the holographic principle, which (according to this recently published article: phys.org/news/2016-11-theory-gravity-dark.html) obsoletes dark matter.
Daniel Clark in that case take a look at the publication of John Macken 'The universe is only spacetime' onlyspacetime.com
I would really like spacetime to do a compendium on these alternative theories with pros and cons, and for that matter do a show on Mackens publication as they did on the dark energy publication.
Is dark matter a thing? The original preprints:
arxiv.org/abs/1001.0785 (2010)
arxiv.org/abs/1611.02269 (2016)
Hey I'm also Daniel Clark, hello Daniel Clark!
What if the universe actually is hyperbolic or more likely curved, but dark energy is only able to accelerate the universe to a point where it is observed as flat and another undiscovered force or constant is preventing it from either going over or less than that acceleration.
Almost as if there was an anti-big rip mechanism (force) counteracting dark energy, much like there is some weird force that causes light to stay at a specific speed.
I'm not an expert, but I think that it's even more unlikely than you think. We know about how much dark matter there is and from there about how much dark energy, and then when you use the friedmann equations that gives you expansion. Basically we can observe effects of dark energy/matter on galaxies and things and predict what that would do to the galaxy. That being said, we don't actually know if the universe is accelerating expansion, so your theory could be true but in the opposite way :).
+JMEssex we literally measured the curvature of the observable universe. It appears to be quite flat. So either it's so large that our observable universe isn't big enough to notice how curved it is or it's definitely flat.
Thanks for the most complete explanation for a layperson I've ever heard.
This series of videos is so addictive.
Whoa what an episode I need a nap now
Why do I keep coming to have my brain liquidated? Watched a couple hours worth of these the last couple days and it's really expanding on a lot of what I read back in the '00s on the topic.
Andrew Wright your dark matter is certainly increasing
2:22 - this is a great example of something that worries me in all of science. Here they admit that they are invested in their playlist, and don't want to delete it. This is analogous to scientists with things like Nobel prizes, careers and papers written. They are invested in not accepting new data as they have lots to lose by it. Just an observation.
Just because a theory ends up proven wrong doesn't mean its mention should be wiped off history. It's important to know all the approaches that have been taken and failed if one is to know where not to go.
"Science advances one funeral at a time" - Max Planck
Scientists are still human and the sunk cost fallacy can still get to them, but what really makes a good scientist is being able to recognize that type or thought or emotional conflict in yourself and reconcile that with the actual results you are getting from your experiments.
Actually this is pretty much wrong, scientists love disproving ideas because it means there are new exciting theories to explore.
Matt, video about the new paper 'Evidence for anisotropy of cosmic acceleration ' please
Awesome episode as always ! thank you very much :)
Wow! 15:20 You can see diffraction lines when you look through a gap in your fingers when you hold them really close together! I've just done it and you can see them clearly! Why didn't I know this before‽
right! i got so excited when i saw them!!
It looks pretty cool imo, doesn't it?
Pandaa Bro
Wave/particle duality.
WeStRnInFideL Yes?
The universe is Flat! Checkmate Flat Earthers :D
wait a sec...
They wouldn't get anything in this vid whatching and thinking about it the lifetime of the universe...
I tapped to the left of the like button and it disliked. GG, UA-cam!!
Don't see the connection... Plus, we don't know if it's flat or not.
No the model of the universe is flat, however it's actually layers of magnetic lines of force connecting each planet to every other planet, sun, etc... in the universe... They even found "portals" along these lines of force that act and move faster than light... the effect is seen from lines of force coming from our sun, I read an article about it awhile back. They found particles moving faster than they "should" i.e. faster than light.
The universe is *very clearly* saddle shaped... ua-cam.com/video/sqjzzv133bI/v-deo.html
I love listening to this guy. He's so smart and explains things so well.
I vote we start calling it "Grid Energy" in memory of Iain M. Banks :)
This is why I love science.. it is true humility to allways be ready to have been wrong... to let the observable and measurable things speak and regard humans as those who want to learn and discover and play around whith theories... and test it out to see if a theory actually are stable or if it can be broken by other observations... science are where truth grows and grows and continues to exite and amaze humans❤️
Yesssss! :'>
True scientists indeed think like this ... unfortunately some fake arogant scientists like Neil degrasse tyson think they know everything
Dank Boi New rule... if you can't spell you're not allowed to call anyone anyone arrogant.
@@bigkahuna1950 sure bro
@@Hawaiipaul *Actors. Who can say what they think?
Brilliant series of videos.
I could listen to you talk all day.
Hi! Thanks for all your great videos. Can you please do a piece explaining in more detail the ideas of Erik Verlinde in "Emergent gravity and the dark universe"? Thanks!
1. Why do we hear so little about dark flow?
2. Why is it not considered there is somthing we cant see beyond the observable horizon that accounts for the "missing matter" problem?
Because they can estimate the mass off the matter outside of the observable edge, and it still comes out to be not even close to enough matter in the world
Lee Dawkins You answered your 2nd question. We can't see it.
GamingEchelon he means beyond the observable horizon, as in the part where its so far away that the light from there hsnt reached us
I would think dark flow isn't said much for two reasons. One, we can't make claims about it since we don't know why it exists really, and two the media hasn't picked up on it probably because of the first reason mostly. It is considered there is matter outside of the horizon, but since we can see effects of matter around us on other matter, and it only affects nearby matter significantly, we can figure out average matter density for the observable universe. It is probable that the unobservable universe is pretty close to that, as long as the big bang theory is employed, since all matter was approximately equally dense everywhere and expanded equally. In any case, the missing matter problem would not be solved by normal matter for a few reasons. One, matter only works on nearby matter unless it has ridiculous mass. It is very unlikely something larger than all observed normal matter exists outside of our view. Even if it did, it is very clear that specific galaxies are being affected differently and it isn't on a gradient like that would suggest. Even if it were spread out, you would expect to see fringe galaxies affected more, which they aren't. Hope this helps.
Because anything beyond the observable horizon can't have affected what we can see. That's what makes it the horizon. If the cause (your mysterious thing) had enough time to affect the object we're observing AND there was enough time for that light to get from there to us, then we'd also be able to see the cause. Nothing travels faster than light, and that's how the observable horizon is defined.
Excellent presentations.
You have the best narration.
Wait, a flat universe?
The fuck did i miss in the last 2 decades?
+Bobfermasan basically we measured the curvature of the freaking observable universe and determined it to be rather likely to be flat.
Bobfermasan
imagine a pancake. if you look closely you will find that is not flat in very small area.
The flatness of the universe is in reference to space-time and not the physical positions of matter.
Our spacial geometry is still 3-dimensional. They're not saying that the universe spreads out in a flat plane that we could observe with our own eyes (like the solar system). From what I understand, they're talking about the curvature of spacetime as a whole. Imagine you have two perfectly straight parallel lines that extended out across the entire visible universe. In our "flat" universe, that geometry is possible. In a curved universe, the lines would eventually curve (and become not parallel, I believe). I'm a little rusty of the finer points of this issue, I admit.
+Matthew Scatterty You're essentially correct but i think the proper geometric test is the use of a triangle, specifically:
If angle of triangle is:
>180 Universe is (positively) curved
=180 Universe is flat
Oops I forgot, there was an article on physorg recently about a possible new theory of gravity that explain the universe without needing dark matter, could you do a show about it?
If there is no dark matter that means no wrap drive too
SlyPearTree
Interesting... I'm not understanding why gravitational force would change over distance like that other than tailoring an explanation to fit the observations, but it is an interesting hypothesis.
there are a couple alternatives to dark matter/energy .. those two are just the mainstream theories
Just found your Channel and omg i Love it
I almost teared up at that closing statement
Actually, serious question this time... If the universe was curved, wouldn't it and everything in it, including light, and us, be distorted in such a way that these huge triangles would appear flat to us? Like the inhabitants of Flatland were their 2D universe wrapped around the surface of a ball? If we're curved in a higher spatial dimension, how could we, as three dimensional beings, ever perceive that?
(I mean, unless we found out that the universe wrapped around like a game of Asteroids)
Actually no! Think about it this way: if you measure the angles of a triangle on the surface of the Earth (assuming you live on a 2-dimensional space that is the surface of the earth) you will find out (entirely 2-dimensionally) that the angles sum up to more than 180 degrees!
Think about 2 points on the equator (farily distant) and 1 point on the north pole. You would draw a line that lies on the equator that connects the 2, and then 2 meridian lines that connect each point with the north pole. Since equator is perpendicular to all meridians, both angles on the equator are exactly 90 degrees. Then you have to add up the third angle at the north pole, which is bigger than zero, so you get 180 degrees plus the third angle.
There you go, perfect proof that the surface of the earth is curved without ever considering the 3 dimensions!
You are correct, and it does, but the ball (or the screen) is so big that we will never get information that has gone all the way around the backside and come back into play. Our whole observable part of the universe has a curvature of something like less than .4%, so the ball is at least 250 times larger than than anything we will ever see. Actually, it is probably a torus, donut-shaped like a multi-dimensional smoke ring expanding from the initial big bang explosion, but either way our little patch of it is almost "flat" for practical purposes.
Imagine living on a giant donut that is constantly growing faster than you can run. You will never be able to do a lap around it. Basically, that's the shape of the situation in the universe. Compared to that, our galaxy is just a little speck of the sugar coating on the surface. Enjoy the sweet life :)
animist channel actually if you keep running and it keeps growing the part behind you is growing too so if you run for long enough you CAN get all the way around. Picture a clock hand ticking slowly while the entire clock grows and grows. (that's actually a poor analogy since the arc covered per tick accelerates significantly, maybe an ant crawling around a clock is better)
animist channel That's what I thought, that we were on the surface of a hypertorus, and therefore curved.
That finger slit light diffraction test can be the secret salute Science Believers can use when Science Deniers take over and start persecuting us.
Pipe2DevNull oh I'm totally up for this!
This is good. It's like saying, "Deny all you like, I can see your wave function!"
Distraction?
"Hey check out this finger slit!" [steals wallet]. "Aww, you missed it ~sucker!~"
Auto correct
There are science deniers on every continent (well, except maybe Antarctica). Don't know why you'd have to call out Africa?
This channel is awesome.
New layman theory is: expansion and contraction track a wavelength pattern; exponential expansion, stability, exponential contraction, stability. Rinse and repeat!
the washing machine analogy?
What if dark energy doesn't exist but that the universal law of gravity is changed with the expansion of spacetime
Natethesandman1 It's actually both. The universal law of gravity is just an approximation of general relarivity. However, it is true that laws of Physics may change over spacetime.
+Salamandra They may?
Feynstein 100
Yup. We used to think that our universe was completely symmetric but, for example, weak force is not totally symmetric.
So, now it´s not so crazy to think that over great distances laws of physics may change.
***** That's quite a heavy predicament.
Feynstein 100
Yes it is, but it´s only an idea, we need an experiment to confirm it or discard it.
Dark energy-- very high caffeine coffee.
Brooks Silber - I LOVE your comment!
Thank you for the 'shot' of positivity, espresso style. (
This comment inspired me to have some coffee.
Your comment, inspired me!
Thank you 🤗🍁
Even darker Energy--- very high cannabioid hash oil chite. Ground/pressed Kïfï plastiline, soft as a butter, no E-numbers. Pure trance-kaïf.
7 years later and I am putting two fingers up and looking at a light. Amazing!
Wow the finger slit experiment thing is really neat.
Centrifuge Cities... I can't get over the thought of people living in spinning cities, on a spinning planet, in a spinning solar system, in a spinning galaxy and.... I'm dizzy just thinking about it.
Who in the world dislikes these videos? Why are you watching *ANYTHING* on this channel if the gears in that head of yours don't function? People who don't understand shite he'll talk about, still come here to understand how *much* they *don't* know! What are you so afraid of? This stuff might help you survive in the vastness of spacetime, when the great war begins. Winter is coming... (I mean.. Literally, yeah?)
it is possible those are just bots.... or butthurt dark energy proponents :-D
WHY in the name of everything sacred do you bring the politics here?
yeap !! this is by far the best channel on the freaking youtube
Gravity fails on galaxies so we invented dark matter. Gravity fails on universe level so we invented dark energy. By now the patches are one order of magnitude bigger than the object. But hey, we are 5 sigma confident everything is under control.
Adamast It seems a good point you are making. Except we did not invent dark matter and dark energy as actual things we believe exist and believe to know what they are. They are just the present model of explaining a weird behavior we have observed repeatedly and consistently.
who made the music for this episode???!!!! usually it is good atmospheric electronics but for this episode it was so good that it is a bit distracting, specially there is a segment where it is brillantly dark and ominous ambient! Kudos for the really cool music for this awesome science show
I got one thing out of this: spooky action up close and personal with fingers...
you know what's sad. when you love this stuff and have been subscribed to this channel for half a year but you are a high-schooler who is making a 49% in his precalculus class.
So did the math grades get better when you got out of the bs HS classes and into a proper math class or are you a philosophy major now?
@@MrDJAK777 Lol neither, but are you a law major with your guess work? You seem to know everything
@@darthgrif6543 Maybe.
Tbc that joke was more targeted at physics than you in particular.
@@MrDJAK777 Oh
The Skeptics Guide to the Universe talked about this.
I'm willing to bet that we'll find out that Type 1A supernovas aren't quite the "standard candles" we thought they were.
Just wondering, did you watch the video past 6:30? And if so, did you understand what he said? Because it sounds like one of those things you didn't do.
David Stagg I watched it. All I was saying is that the Skeptics' guys (and girls) did a show about this, so I knew about it already. My comment about the Type 1A supernovas is just a musing about what might be skewing the new results...that's all.
ChaosmanOne Except that he pretty conclusively showed why your worry isn't true, there is nothing wrong with type 1A supernova as standard candles. He even explained how this new work actually gave the same results as the original work back in 1998-1999, the media is just misunderstanding the paper (as they usually do). The work back then had 0 DE as a possibility, same as this new work does. And the work back then also only had a 3 sigma confidence in their result, same as this new work.
Try listening to his explanation again, he also explains why this isn't an issue because of other data we have. We never just relied on the supernova data alone and we aren't doing so now either.
ChaosmanOne I dont understand how they could be. Stars very similar in mass still have slightly different mass. Its a case of scientific hubris in my opinion.
Will Lastnameguy It's to do with the tipping point at which a star's gravity overcomes the opposing force. Holding that physics is the same everywhere, then the tipping point is universal. Hence standard brightness.
Excelent.
Just saw those 'interence patterns' this morn while applying a (tempered) glass screen protector on my phone. Afterwards, found that I left a 'bubble' of air inside it, leaving Newton's Rings.
Managed to remove (with a small box cutter) by lifting edge closest to bubble slightly and pushing it towards edge
"we made this playlist, its pretty hardcore"
can comfirm
So, what you're saying is the devs finally fixed their gravity code.
I love this show. You know they first thought yeah we'll talk about space time. Theres alot of people who want learn about this.
(5 years later) So were out were done. Now you can go write your thesis and get your phd.
I tricky topic clearly and intelligently explained, thank you.
Has anyone considered the possibility that the curvature of the universe might not be constant? Typically, there are three geometrical scenarios postulated for the shape of the universe: open, flat or closed. However, since the curvature at any given point in the continuum is a result of the local changes to the shape of the "fabric" of space-time itself due to masses of nearby objects and thermodynamic effects, the concept of a variable curvature is introduced. Hence, the curvature of the universe as whole could very well be indeterminate.
The universe was weird shaped curves, it would be very unstable and wobbly, and it's not. The shapes predicted are predicted as such because they are stable, not cause Scientists have OCD. The flat universe or Spherical universe theories are the most stable, followed by the parabolic and the donut/croissant shape. Other shapes are possible, but something "wiggly" and different shaped all over would probably lead to extreme erratic and weird distortions of gravity and distant light we simply don't see. In fact, those things are so smooth from our observation, it's one of the main reason modern scientist think the flat universe theory is true. I personally have a strong lean towards the "croissant' shape universe, because that is the shape of energy massing around black holes, which I (and many scientist) think may be linked to the creation of universes.
However, most of these things are extremely theoretical, since we have so little of the universe to look at to determine it's shape. The "Observable universe" stretching out around 14 billion light years from us is estimated by some to be as small as 0.01% of the universe. (Others estimate it as large as 20% or more though) So for all we know it's so large we can't even begin to see it's overall shape.
Yes Space is flat, but space-time is not. Mass bends space-time around it. this is why time progresses at a slower rate near earth than it does where we place satellites. Without this concept "gps just doesn't work". Now some thing to think about is: time is a variable based on gravitational pull and velocity. So lets put a way to measure time any where. 1 second on earth is slower than 1 second in orbit. Only around 36 microseconds but you could still say that the value of 1 second on earth has greater value than one second in orbit. Just as if time were money and you were exchanging different currencies.
Velocity = change in distance over time, when you increase the value of the bottom of a fraction the overall number goes down and visa-versa. So the velocity and acceleration of an object way out in space would appear to be going faster and accelerating change in time^2 for that than they really are. Granted, 0 velocity and acceleration is still 0 when thinking about it this way. But, nothing ever really has 0 velocity or acceleration in this universe because any object has to be at 0 kelvin in order to be not be moving.
If this is true then the speed of light is still constant but it may appear to go faster or slower in parts of the universe. This could account for the red-shifting. But, maybe they did already take this into account when they made their analysis. I haven't actually read the reports.
@@ThrottleKitty mmm croissants
Weird, I've had my own personal very unique theory on how gravity works, and I'd theorized based on it that dark energy didn't necessarily have to be expanding. Nor did it have to NOT be. The speed of expansion might even be localized to different regions of the universe, and the relative speed of light is likely affected by these tiny variations. In my opinion, further study will eventually show the size of the object effects how much dark energy 'pushes' it, just like dark matter and gravity. Which are basically two sides of the same force. Kinda like the electro-strong-weak forces all use to be a singular force and now work together to drive basically everything about how atoms work with bosons.
This is actually possible. Simply becoming aware of things can drastically change the future quantum physics teach us
my precious says it is the black holes swallowing the material which are popping extra grid in order to keep booking of the mass/energy at threshold density of Planckian length at event horizon....
that's actually a really funny title, did dark energy just disappear? it's always been disappeared, that's why they call it dark energy .... hehe sorry it just made chuckle a little ...
I don't know this.
went right over my head i do try honest i do
*_Nothing_* beats the greatest brainchild of the human brain-the scientific method, whose solid yet pliable backbone is the fusing of constructive criticism, rigorous skepticism, a vivid imagination, and above all the consuming curiosity of a child.
💕 ☮ 🌎 🌌
This is very profound for interstellar travel in the future. If humans have to make long distant astrometric calculations to traverse greater than 1 light year distances than you had better know if the universe is flat or curved. You get two completely different flight paths depending on your approach.
The difference of the experiments was a dark energy wave ...
But that's future info.
I've got a question. How possible is it that dark energy is the result of gravitational waves?
My point is that we know that energy from gravitational waves comes from the kinetic energy from matter and, like ripples in a pond, it could push out other matter and even stretch the boundaries of the fabric of space-time.
The acceleration would come by the addition over time of ever more ripples and the thermal end of the universe as the result of all energy transformed into space-time reaching its maximum size.
Gravitational waves are fully described by general relativity, so what you say isn't predicted by it. So not possible.
Tony Wells Actually, what he said was exactly what GR predicts with a positive cosmological constant.
Philip No. The energy released in the form of gravitational waves is not thought to be anywhere near as great as 70% of the total energy of the universe.
Waves don't work like that. when a wave passes under an object, it moves it back and forth or up an down, but it always goes back to its original position. If it moves after it's because it's releasing its potential energy from being part of a kinetic wave. But. You did make an interesting point. For example, why do the stars look dimmer when there is a city near by and why aren't they seen during the day? Light is a wave. The more waves or of a wave there is, the more it drowns out all the other waves. That's what explains red shifts. We shouldn't be measuring the distance the light has traveled, we should be measuring how far away the source is. If there is all this other stuff filling the sky with waves, it only makes what we do see brighter and seem further away. Because, now all that real red shifted light is in contact with closer and brighter red light. I completely understand the point you made. I have not thought about that. That actually sounds like it's plausible. the way I see what you said is this, we are not expanding into nothing, we are taking up space at any rate. I don't actually believe in gravity. I believe in natural physical laws like Newton's three laws of motion. So I don't even believe in gravity and think what you said makes sense. From my perspective on what you said, the universe is expanding and the more matter there is now in that space, the more space it is going to eventually expand into. Kind of like a miniature big bang, it absorbed so much energy that it had no choice but to expand into the emptiness which is space, with matter because the matter was what was making the energy. So, to answer your concern, yes you are right. The more matter in the universe there is, the bigger the universe is going to get. Makes sense. What is matter and energy?
Please start using Bayesian computational modelling instead of hypothesis testing..... Great video!!
Wouldn't it depend on where you look?
I was under the impression that voids are expanding, perhaps other regions aren't expanding as much?
Couldn't it be a really messed up bed spread?
Wait...what? 😂😂
just kidding. Great video as usual! Thank you for educating countless people! 🏳
Thé more we know, the more we don’t know.
I would love to see you do a piece on Halton Arp, please.
At 8:26 It is mentioned that the universe in the red circle has almost no matter in it whereas the graph shows this universe has almost no dark matter in it. It's a different interpretation altogether which assumes that there is dark matter.
Exactly! There are new indications and a 2020 update to the 2016 paper that caused this video.. And it turns out that the Nobel Prize winners supernova study not only had a meager sample size but as the updated paper shows, all of the supernovas in the original study were in 1 half of the sky and almost all of the shifts can be exampled by the movement of our local dipole movement of our local galactic group/solar system as it spins around the center of Milky Way. There may not be any Dark Energy and Dark Matter may be radically different in composition and scope than previously thought or may not exist at all (MOND)
What if our observable universe is just a tiny region of a much bigger universe?
Similar to the Great Attractor, but inside out, our entire universe would be attracked equally in all directions toward something we can't see because light would not have reach us yet.
Like if we were a small bubble of lower density universe inside a much more, heavier, wider and perhaps non-accelerating universe.
Would that be something that could explain the acceleration of our expanding observable universe?
Les Idées Reçues I would be interested to hear an educated response to this questing 👍
Question*
Les Idées Reçues I'm not a physicist or anything, to me though it sounds weird. Correct me if I'm wrong, it would mean that all we see in the observable universe is expanding but on the larger scale it's getting smaller? Wouldn't that be seen somehow in our region of the universe? 14 billion light years is a pretty long distance.. idk I'm a self proclaimed internet scientist xD
Malte Bergman it would still be expanding on the larger scale... but maybe not accelerating.
I'm not a physicist, but my idea is that since gravitational waves travel with the speed of light, if we were affected by the pull of something outside, we would be able to see it.
Dark Energy is disappearing because we are making the universe great again! MUGA!
J C very funny 😄 and clever 😜😁😁😁😁😁
Are you sure it isn't because of the hope and change?
@@BladeOfLight16 is this a reference
@Dinosaurus Rex
"Make ___________ great again" is a Trump reference. "Hope and change" is an Obama reference.
Donald Kasper what?
PBS space time...A good non-technical explanation of a complex subject.
It would be interesting to figure out if the univers is undergoing regular changes in its expansionrates. Mabey simular to the climatic fluctuations our own planet is going through.
huge fan of spacetime and fellow aussie, can i get a whats up?
Matt Thorgood I'll give you a g'day!
'sup, fellow Matt?
Holy hell they answered! Keep the videos coming!
S' happening space time. Keep up the good work
'sup fellow aussie :P
Ok so I literally have math to back up these claims, as well as others, but I don't know what to do with them, will SpaceTime, what do I do??!
A New Perspective Films, If you're serious about it you need to prove your theory faultlessly in an academic paper and have it submitted for peer review. Though I can tell you now you're probably wrong, and publishing a physics paper (even having it reviewed) can be very difficult for a non PHD. Good luck!
Try submitting for peer review here;
arxiv.org
***** Thanks man for real, I have my paper almost finished as well, I've just never submitted anything for review before!
Maybe watch the entire video before commenting.
Good luck :) let's all hope you're right.
i love this guy, hes pretty good
I realize now that I watch these videos not because I know anything about physics or astronomy, but because this fellow sounds like Peter Dinklage as Tyrion and it's really calming.