It's Official: We Were WRONG About the Big Bang
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 лис 2021
- What is the universe expanding into? Where did the big bang happen?
Sign up for my FREE Varsity Tutors class! → bit.ly/DiannaCowernVTClass2
Check out Varsity Tutors Club STEM! → www.varsitytutors.com/classes...
Support Physics Girl videos → / physicsgirl
Creator/Host: Dianna Cowern
Editor: Levi Butner
Expanding Universe Animation: Keegan Larwin
Cosmology Consultant: Dr. Ethan Siegel
Special thank you to our X-Ray tier patrons: Carlos Patricio, David Cichowski, Eddie Sabbah, Fabrice Eap, Gil Chesterton, Isabel Herstek, Margaux Lopez, Matt Kaminski, Michael Schneider, Patrick Olson, Vikram Bhat, Vincent Argiro, wc993219
Music provided by APM
www.apmmusic.com/
Stock footage provided by Beachfront downloaded from www.videvo.net
Stock footage provided by mitchp downloaded from www.videvo.net
If you liked this video check out these:
A picture of the beginning of the universe
→ www.youtube.com/watch?v=rut6f...
Why is the Universe Flat? ft. Prof Alan Guth
→ www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTUsO...
physicsgirl.org/
Twitter/Insta/Facebook/TikTok: @thephysicsgirl
Sources:
adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1913Lo...
adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1931MN...
www.pnas.org/content/15/3/168
www.nature.com/articles/479171a
www.scientificamerican.com/ar...
phys.org/news/2015-12-big-the...
bigthink.com/starts-with-a-ba...
physicstoday.scitation.org/do... - Наука та технологія
I watch these because I wish I had a friend who was like this. Going for a walk and talking about science... We need more people like this in the world.
Same... I'm this kind of friend, but my friends can't understand wth I'm talking about.
Ditto, although I do have fun messing with people by making up some pseudo-bs that sounds smart and they just nod along and don't bother trying to comprehend.
@@OnceAJay same here. I appreciate those that still stay with me even though they're not interested in space & time 🥲
@@OnceAJay Same
Let's talk about it then :))
"I'd like to explain what happened before the big bang. Unfortunately there is no time."
I'm loving this. It took a few seconds to sink in but not bad, such a precise answer! :)
Read my comment.😊 What happened before... It's cyclic, it follows a pattern, Universe following Universe, following Universe, following Universe...
@@terencegibbins3894 we just don't have enough information. There are some ideas on how cyclical universe's could work but we don't have the evidence to say if they are on the right track.
Yeah I laughed at that 🤣
@@101Mant Well if it isn't cyclic in nature, there had to be some instigator.. Two branes colliding is one theory I've seen for that, but the other I've seen is "God" and honestly, I really want to move as far away from that idea as possible.
@@clocked0 Why would you want to run from that idea? There is a long line of scientists from history to the present who agree that faith and science are not incompatible. Dr. Francis Collins heads one of the greatest scientific achievements of modern times, the Human Genome Project. In his book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Dr. Collins explains how science led him to God.
Diana is a big sister I never had, your enthusiasm and joy while explaining this abstract madness is remarkable, please don't ever stop doing this.
I tripped on your channel because I watch a lot of astronomy videos and you rank as one of the best imo. You explain everything so the younger generations can understand. (I am probably old enough to be your mother), but I so want my Grandchildren to be interested in astronomy. So, thank you for your content! 🌸
“I have more question than before” reminds me of an Einstein quote “The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don’t know”
that's Dunning-Krugger effect. The more you know ... the more you know about what you don't know .
It was Socrates. Stop associating all smart quotes with Einstein.
"Woohoo!!" - Dianna, epic fuzzy cap, et al
Know what you gotta know
Yeah, just like Goethe‘s Faust 😆
As a physicist, thank you very much for sharing science knowledge in such a humble and accessible way! You are planting seeds that will make a difference in the long run 🖤
Or making more Bakers. 😄
@Unedited Life Of Daniel I wonder with quantum magnetic engines (which I would think could take more power than contained in the antiverse to move us out of the universe, should we attempt to go visit there), that we couldn't arrive for a long enough period of time (10-¹⁸ sec) to even know we've been there -- if "there" can actually exist in an ever-changing quantium space-time? 🤔Other than that, Bon Voyage. 🛸
@Unedited Life Of Daniel Time travel may be possible in the quantum realm. A team of physicists at the Universities of Bristol, Vienna, the Balearic Islands and the Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI-Vienna) has shown how quantum systems can simultaneously evolve along two opposite time arrows - both forward and backward in time.
The study, published in the latest issue of Communications Physics, necessitates a rethink of how the flow of time is understood and represented in contexts where quantum laws play a crucial role.
@Unedited Life Of Daniel I have a feeling we will continue to pollute well into the future. But we also have the ability to adapt causing a mutation of the human species turing into something looking like the Borg. Who knows... maybe one day plastic will become a savory dish served at the finest restaurants. 😧
@Unedited Life Of Daniel After the past 3 years, I feel the speed part has escaped into the next realm: E=M² ;-)
Great explanations! However, I always love when physicists, or researchers in general say "That'll never happen" or "That's impossible" while confident in the knowledge that past researchers have been wrong about that statement in MAJOR ways. Science is even based on the idea that being wrong gets us closer to the right answer. And also the irony of the video title along with the likelihood of "That's impossible" being wrong again. XD
Happy physicking though, keep people on their toes
It is a question I've had since childhood: what does it mean to exist? What if we go back in time, back in time, back in time... it is either things got created from nothing, OR things always existed and we can go back in time indefinitely and still observe existing things. Either of these cases is mind blowing. So there must be some "problem" with our understanding of "time".
You know, I think these are some of my favorite videos you do.
The best part of your content is your natural excitement and curiosity. You add to that some really good explanations for making very complex concepts approachable.
It's Official: "It's conceptually impossible to wrap your head around". That's the real underlying gloriousness and magnificence of the universe and infinity. The more knowledge of it we gain, the further we realise we are from its centre, both physically and metaphorically.
Yes that's good working
Perhaps time to try another conceptual conception ;-) But present science did so much good, few try other approaches. We seem to know so much about spacetime quantumfields gravitation but just ignore conciousness or try to explain it ermergent from a material moodball in our scull; a very selective perspective - no wonder the outcome.
Why we need God. We can’t comprehend it by ourselves.
Yeah its tough but nothing is impossible. The fact that we exist is proof of that. Just like the fact that we exist proves that is is "possible" for life to exist in the universe which also proves that it is possible for life to exist in other places than earth but maybe in forms that humans cant understand because all humans know is the laws bound to earth and what has been seen through either an LED screen or sophisticated organized glass.
Think fractally.. as above, so is below.
Thank you so much for pointing out that we may never know what our universe is expanding into since that's "outside" of our universe. Too many science enthusiasts seem to ignore that science has limits, and one of those limits is our universe.
Dianna, I love that you love your work/study/research/career! 😊It really shows every time you speak on the wonders of physics! Thank you for that in itself as well as the information you give. Even if the answers is sometimes "We may never know the true answer because we can not observe it".Totally enjoy your channel! Keep up the great work!!🤩👍
I'm enjoying these on-the-go tutorials more than regular content tbh.. the scenery and energy are awe-inspiring, hope to see more of these soon🤞💕
Yeah, it's a different kind of scenery than you usually see in these "guy talking into a camera" types of videos. It's a nice vibe.
@@vigilantcosmicpenguin8721l
Lopplp
Yes, this explains why I want to make some "Raisin Bread" for my new Physics girl.
It’s really insane how big our universe has gotten in a hundred years.
From a single solar system to a possible multiverse.
Simon Rudbech - and therein lies the joke… which apparently went over your head!
I just took it for granted that we knew for ever about the billions of galaxies outside our Milky Way. I didn't realize that this realization only happened within the last 100 years!
@@tkondaks yeah Our society feels so advanced now, but just a couple generations ago, we thought disease was caused by bad spirits.
Imagine what we will know a hundred years from now.
@@Hooyahfish bad spirits do cause diseases
But don't tempt God by behaving in such as to attract disease
@@cedriceric9730 lmao! That’s hilarious. 🤣
One way of thinking of this, that I've always wondered about, is since there is no 'correct' frame of reference, isn't it equally valid to take the universes expanding frame of reference, and thus we are all shrinking? And if we are all able to be seen as shrinking, nothing physically different, just relative to the universe. Doesn't that then do away with the need to ask "what are we expanding into?"?
No, certain phenomena, equations, etc won't work in a shrinking universe.
@@smurfyday But the universe expanding assumes linear time, is there evidence that time is actually linear beyond our perception of time? Some physicists say time isn't even real, that everything just happens at the same time. From this perspective wouldn't it be accurate to say the universe is both expanding and shrinking simultaneously?
@@daniel4647 You can say that but that doesn't make it true. It's true only if the math works out in all the physics equations. If a certain assumption breaks the equations, i.e. gives wrong results aka. predictions, then it's wrong.
@@smurfyday if the speed of light is gradually slowing down instead of constant, then the equations work.
Wow. Just discovered this channel. She and you folks in the comments are making an old man think too much. Lol
The infinite possibilities of our expanding universe has always intrigued me. My uncle is an astrophysicist and he has been blowing my mind ever since I was a boy. Your video on this topic is what I love the most for sure. Thank you!
Fortunately, we have both the time and the space, to appreciate the pun at the end!
Thanks for clearing my mind
You'll enjoy PBS Space Time
"I have more questions than before, Dianna"
I would love to have a friend like you that just like to explain the things you know and love, and pushes me think so much to the point of having even more questions to talk about.
Your editor is a lucky guy.. 👌
The editor's question marks his as a scientific mind.
Just discovered your videos and I love them. I feel like I'm actually learning something.
You and everyone are always learning something even when we think we aren't, you still are.
That is part of the main function of the conscious mind
The only difference between the big bang, and the big expansion.. is the universe didn't spawn from nothing, it's just always been there.
In both cases though, they were infinitely small and expanded.
So if we reverse the known motions of all the known universe, so now everything is moving together, and the farthest objects are moving faster, ( space is shrinking, the greater the space distance, the more rapid the collapse) then would not all the matter collapse to a single point?
The problem with these eternal verities is the problem with infinity. Infinity is NOT a number, (any number times any number, is yet infinitely far from infinity) and science depends on numbers and relativity, or measurement. Mathematics is the language of science, and that REQUIRES measurement, and numbers and relativity locked into the time continuum of cause and effect.The arrow of time runs in one direction, and effect is proceeded by cause. There cannot be true absolutes, as science, by definitions never sees the whole, but always part of the whole. Math is the language of science, and that depends on numbers, which are self identified as relative, never absolutes.. Even the mathematical symbol of infinity is used only as a symbol of certain relative processes continuing indefinitely until interrupted, such as certain electrical feed-backs, etc...
Yet science is powerless before absolutes, "capable of observing the laws of an existing and functioning cosmos, but powerless to detect the absolute, the law framer: and infinite beyond numbers creator.
Yet logic DEMANDS an absolute. The existence of any THING, demands an absolute. It is NOT science to say, "everything, or "anything" came from nothing" and it is not science to say "everything, or anything always was". (Really those are two identical assertions, both in denial of ALL science)
It is more logical to say everything came from an infinite all powerful first cause, that is beyond the law of cause and affect that science depends on. And regressing the "Big Bang" indeed gets to infinite energy solutions, infinite information-knowledge beyond science solutions.
Meanwhile..If its always just been there. That does not give an answear towards what was before, nor to what it is going to become.
@@davidanderson9074 after all that rambling I'll make it easy for you. Numbers are infinite too. 😁
@@dheasley2 ...at the same time, infinitely far from infinity, as infinity is not a number,
@@davidanderson9074 you can always add 1 more number. It doesn't stop. Just because you can't conceive of such a number doesn't mean numbers aren't infinite. They can keep going forever and span the distance of the infinite universe.
"Conceptually, impossible to wrap your head around." I'm glad you said that, because my head was spinning. I could grasp "the Big Bang," but if the universe did not start from a single point and has always been expanding, with galaxies moving away from us faster than the speed of light? I think I'll go for a walk.
Overthink your conceptions and those given here. Don't think this is the end of the day. Recognise that this broadcast is also conceptually limited.
One of the main reasons 'big bang' is pushed so ferociously is that it has been endorsed by the vatican..
"In fact, it seems that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial 'Fiat lux' (Let there be light) uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of the chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies ... Hence, creation took place in time, therefore, there is a Creator, God exists!" (Pope Pius XII, 1951)
300 years before this, 'the church' had Giordano Bruno publicly murdered for saying that space is infinite..
You 'do the math'.. NO! Please don't! This is why the erroneous ideas of 'infinity' are used in mathematics, specifically to confuse people into a misunderstanding of what infinitude actually means.. If space is infinite, 'god' cannot be..
she didn't really say there was no big bang. She just said it didn't start out a singularity.
isn't there a difference between a ring & a figure eight ? a figure eight is never over ,trapped ,boxed in . It's a matter of time not so with a circle
@@Bigfoots777 Tell me why I was literally thinking about this too. The figure 8 is a really good representation of infinity, but I couldn’t quite put into words why it was a better figure representation than a circle. I think you might have put it best.
This is amazing to me because just recently my son and I had this discussion. It was a simpler discussion because my son is only 8YO, and I’m something of a simpleton myself. Anyway, I explained it like this. When I think of the universe, I assume it to be EVERYTHING, in other words all the multiverses or exoverses, or whatever the latest fad science is out there. All this 3 dimensional stuff is expanding. It can’t expand if we can’t observe it happen within a context of time. So, there’s a 4th dimension involved. So, where is it expanding into? A 5th (or higher) spatial dimension. He bought it. End of story. Someday I hope he will come back to me and say, “Hey, remember when you said ….. . Well, you were wrong. What’s really happening is ….. “
This is NOT the comment of a “simpleton”.
@@engine2truck6 i was thinking the same
Now hear out my simpleton idea:
Everything we see outside our solar system is a 'lie'
If our own sun is forever 8 minutes older than we can perceive
Then imagine all the observable stars, their planets, their lack of life, etc nothing is how they're supposed to appear.. (they're just history)
My son just told me that God is baking the universe like a loaf 🍞 of bread 🤣
@@net_lag 🤷🏽♂️
I love watching videos like this because you and other content creators are just so excited to talk about all this stuff. It makes me genuinely wish that I had someone that I could call up and just rant about all the neat stuff happening in my field, too.
What's your field mate?
@@aymonfoxc1442 I'm a mental health care worker. Lots of new and interesting stuff comes up all the time, but very few people will listen to me talk about it for very long before changing the subject.
@@CinJyxxe I can sympathise. I'm an environmental scientist and an urban planner. Few people want to hear much about the actual science of things like ecology and climate change unless it reinforces their political views and urban planning follows a similar pattern wherein a lot of people are only interested if they have something to gain.
Mental health care is certainly an interesting field. I have family and friends who suffer and it's an experience we all have to confront. Could I ask what innovations / approaches are new or evolving in your field that you find exciting?
Your description of the singularity as a small space with infinitely many galaxies reminds me of Zenos paradox. The galaxies were infinitely close but separate, with means they'll always be separate as the universe expands! That's so cool
Lemaître is just pronounced leu-meh-trrr ;-) (it literally means "the master")
And the caret signifies "an S missing here"
@@JohnVanPelt exactly, tâche task / maître master / fête festivity / côte coast / château Castle / quête quest, on so one...
Pronunciation of foreign names (or even of English words) is hard to convey via English spelling, as English is very inconsistent in how it maps between letters and sounds. So let's use the international phonetic alphabet instead: The name is pronounced ʒɔʁʒ ləmɛːtʁ in French. (Lemaître was Belgian.) Listen to that pronunciation here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fr-Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre.oga
One may pronounce it ləˈmɛtrə in English.
@@JohnVanPelt That's not a caret. That's a circumflex.
@@WDCallahan sorry, I should have put “caret” in quotes, since it was the term used in the video. I almost added “circonflexe” but decided not to muddy the point of my comment.
The theory of the big bang expanding from one small point never jived with me, so I'm happy to hear that theory is evolving.
One of the main reasons 'big bang' is pushed so ferociously is that it has been endorsed by the vatican..
"In fact, it seems that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial 'Fiat lux' (Let there be light) uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of the chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies ... Hence, creation took place in time, therefore, there is a Creator, God exists!" (Pope Pius XII, 1951)
300 years before this, 'the church' had Giordano Bruno publicly murdered for saying that space is infinite..
You 'do the math'.. NO! Please don't! This is why the erroneous ideas of 'infinity' are used in mathematics, specifically to confuse people into a misunderstanding of what infinitude actually means.. If space is infinite, 'god' cannot be..
exactly, why can't everything be compressed into something the size of a baseball or even the size of earth. Why does it have to be so small we can't even see it. I never saw what made the theory say why it was that way either.
Me too actually. An infinitely sense point that expanded should contain infinite energy or zero volume but greater than one mass
And that is not the case
These are the same are the same topics that I enjoy talking about with people. The way you break it down is your biggest talent! Keep it up! I've got a new one in the world, and I'd love to see some good places to start. Hope I can always be able to reference your videos! Lol, that in time may be a cosmic mystery to find!
I think, as humans, we try to conceptualize that everything is within a container of something else. Because of this it is impossible for us to think of infinite space because we expect it to be within something else. And even if the universe was in a container, one would then wondered what that container was in.
It works the other direction as well. People kept searching for what materials were made from and things just get smaller and smaller. What is the smallest part of an atom made from? And what is that made from? We will keep scratching at the quest to find what is in the next container.
I love that you think it's excellent that Levi has more questions now than he did before. That phenomena is what keeps me interested in learning about science and everything else.
SAME! This is the best outcome.
@@physicsgirl great statement we will never know
More questions is what science is all about. When there are no more questions science is dead.
It will be a sad day for all scientists when the last question is answered.
So, great response "Excelent!".
Scientists make it look like they are looking for the theory of everything. But they aren't. Because when they find it, they're out of jobs. So, if you want a conspiracy: Scientists are conspiring to not do what they say. They don't want THE answer. They only want part of it. And they are careful they won't get all the parts.
If the the space is expanding how.come the distance between the sun and earth and other planet and even andromeda galaxies distance from milky way never changed.If indeed the space actually streatch out it should happened in all part of the universe and.not for those. faraway object or galaxies that were obseved by hubble that seem to be. speeding away from us.
@@grande6075 actually Andromeda and the Milky Way are moving closer on a collision course at around 1.3 lightseconds per hour. So gravity can overcome that expansion of spacetime locally.
Every time she almost explains something, then pauses, and excitedly asks him (the camera) if he has any ideas, i have a mini heart attack.
@TILEN FABE not sure
@TILEN FABE Yeah, I’ve heard this before and it was pretty impactful. Crazy thought about how many assumptions we make within assumptions to get us to the best understanding we can try to have
@TILEN FABE There's definitely more than one clue. If you want to explore it in further detail, PBS Spacetime goes into the nitty gritty of it.
That last bit about maybe our universe bubble is expanding and other bubbles outside our bubble are shrinking (becoming more dense?) makes the most sense to me. Our perception is only limited by the way we measure things and assume constants. For example, what if the steel ruler is expanding or shrinking at the same rate logorithmically as the thing you're measuring, then it would appear that nothing has changed.
Today I learned the motion of raisins relative to their locality from the centre within an expanding baking loaf, and to insert more raisins in the outer dough for increased expansion compensation/raisin density equilibrium, thanks :)
"Everything was infinitely closer together" That sounds like a singularity to me. Much respect to the holder of the greatest hat in the universe.
Not excactly. A singularity means that everything came together to a single point. What she meant is that going back in time, the universe was infinitely smaller, but never into a single point. Although I'm not sure how this idea doesn't collide with the maths behind the planck lenth.
@@jordyv.703 Infinitely closer is the exact definition of singularity, not the zero size.
@@jordyv.703 Singularity just means a point where some function (or a mathematical description of nature) "blows up" (e.g. it goes to infinity, like when there's a divide by zero), or is otherwise not "well-behaved" (this is context-dependent). In other words, it's conditions under which the theory kinda stops working or making sense. So a non-single point big bang is also a singularity (it's just a different interpretation of what the math means); the video was wrong to cross the term (note, though, that Dianna never said anything about there not being a singularity at the birth of the universe, she just said that it's a misconception to think about it as of a single point - that is, the "cosmic egg" idea shouldn't be taken too literally).
@@filipmilovanovic8942 so what was it if not a single point?
Keep in mind that (both theoretically and practically) some infinities are larger than other infinities. It's also not too terribly wrong to conceptualize the pre-expansion universe as infinitely more dense than the current universe, rather than infinitely smaller.
That there were so many 'maybes' and questions at the end meant you done it right, Dianna. You explained it, and it's 'clear as mud.' That's theoretical physics: not afraid to thoroughly discuss the unknown while avoiding the arrogance of attempting to strictly define it.
9:10 - 9:30 - after I “learned” the concept of the initial blob of something was expanding away from itself, I had always wondered what kind of “space” it was expanding into (because we were never quite told, hence “Physics Girl’s” video), I had always thought that this blob was moving and breaking up into “empty space, which expands infinitely in all directions, which is “empty” except where blob pieces have already expanded into.
It is much easier for me to believe that space extends infinitely in all directions, than to believe that space only extends out to a certain distance, because then you would have to explain what is on the other side of that.
A finite universe is actually quite easy to grasp if it’s topologically closed. A sphere has a finite surface area, but it also doesn’t have an edge, it doesn’t just end. It can also expand, like inflating a balloon. That’s more along the lines of what current models of a finite expanding universe are like.
It does leave the question of what it’s expanding into, but that question basically remains with an infinite universe as well, _how_ is it expanding, the fuzziness of infinity just makes it easier to accept.
I'm so happy I stumbled upon this. Thank you for the video. I absolutely loved it.
I love such videos where u and ur camera man walk around in nature; talking about thought provoking and Intriguing concepts. Surrounded by such glamourous view u look like a curious kid who wants to know more and more and more and more about the nature of everything. The calm I find in such videos is indescribable. Thank u so much !!!
Great video -- French names can be hard to pronounce: Lemaître would be pronounced kind of like "Le - MEH - tre". Which translates to "The Master", by the way (any Dr. Who fans?). Fun fact, it is also a homonym for the French phrase "The meter". Love the videos!
Hmmm. Excellent! The Meter is a "master" unit of measurement. Resonance!
I imagine the very question of "What does the universe expand into?" is irrelevant. Because space expands exponentially faster from your reference point the farther out you go. And it very quickly goes past the speed of light.
So even if you find some way to travel faster than light, the farthest reaches reality would always be faster than you. By a lot. And even if you managed to reach the edge of reality, it'd be a one way trip anyways. Because as you fight to overcome the exponential expansion rate of one direction, you are inversely increasing that distance all other general directions simply by moving in one direction.
So even if you discover what lies outside the universe, if there even is an edge, you'd literally never be able to tell anyone about what you observed.
So excellent! Don't stop. You have a very bright future. Keep teaching others what you are learning... gorgeous presentation
Your passion absolutely pours through when you talk about science, always a pleasure to see. Also, that hat is dope.
Just makes me happy to see people so passionate about science♥️
…well, passionate about SciFi, anyhow. The Big Bang isn’t science. Scientific theories can be falsified. The BB has been falsified multiple times, but it’s proponents keep propping it up with even more fanciful leaps of the imagination which defy all logic and reason (but nonetheless make a good story). It long ago crossed over into the realm of pseudoscience, and its proponents are zealots.
Side note: It appears that Doppler shift isn’t the only thing which causes redshift. Halton Arp demonstrated as much, with his catalog of pairs of highly redshifted quasars connected to far less redshifted parent galaxies. He found hundreds of such examples. So we can’t say that the universe is expanding, simply because we see redshift everywhere. Another nail in the coffin of the Big Bang.
@@MagicHawkeye So how do you think the universe came to be? Genuine question?
Pathetic
@Seven Inches of Throbbing Pink Jesus Science is faith through observation and experiments. Religion is faith without evidence. Very subjective through personal emotional experiences, era and location. Over the millenniums, science have has led mankind from living in caves to modern cities with all the luxuries and quality of that our ancestors would think are magical.
Over the millenniums, religion has led mankind to the same threats, wars, miseries and promises that never come to fruition. Your comfort from your home to spouse religious nonsense to a mass audience is because of science, not your religion or anyone else religions.
Yes denial of facts is a powerful force.
@Seven Inches of Throbbing Pink Jesus
Science doesn't have "faith" in what it doesn't knw, science admits it doesn't know. Religion claim to know it all and claims to have the answer to everything. Just "believe" in a almighty mythical being, in the west, it usually means a Jewish fantasy god and all things will work out like magic.
Science facts change with more knowledge, religion dogma stays the same just like the same as with their bronze age beliefs regardless of new facts.
Before science, it was the philosophers job to find out why things are the way they are. They were all wrong and we no longer ask philosophers for why things work the way they do. Religion has become the philosophy of modern times, seeking an answer and "purpose" of why we are here and they are wrong just like philosophers were.
I've been wondering about this for a few years! Thank you!
When I was a young person, my Father and I would have discussions as to the possibility, or likelihood, of 'multiple universes'. We felt these were questions of a 'science fiction' nature, and we were conceptualizing them just out interest.
Hey Dianna! I just wanted to tell you i'm so geeked out and also moved by your videos. I had no idea about you starting to have full control of your channel and catching up on your recent content it's a huge change. I love your videos and am really inspired. Keep up the beyond amazing work
Along the lines of that last bit about infinity, I had a thought some years ago that maybe infinity was the normal state of things, and the miracle was that from it, something finite manifested. And not just in an outward sense, or farther or bigger, but also inward, smaller. As if we only have touched or seen the tiniest sliver of the scale of the cosmos. Like existence as we know it is only an island of finite and measurable things, suspended in the middle of a scale which reaches to infinity in both directions. Both the infinitely large and the infinitely small.
are you aware that infinities are a philosophical non-sense?
@@zazugee I think your statement is absurd!
@@zazugee Infinities are nonsense, period. Even in philosophy the term "infinity" or "endless" means that something is wrong...
Very powerful thought, thank you for sharing. Would it really be so surprising that the philosophy of a finite being sees infinity as impossible?
@@willlucas2491 Finite being? Being is what is, and all that is is finite. I mean "being" as in objective reality, not something that is theoretical and can't be defined with proper analytical definition. So, a finite being is an oxymoron of a sort.
i found this channel by accident today and after couple of videos i watched, i'm so sorry about what such a bright and nice person is going through right now. i wish her all the best, hope she'll get well soon.
My fav is you are talking about such things and wearing such a boss hat! Thank you for showing science can be seriously fun!
I am totally excited that you’re so excited about this topic. I’m glad I have someone knowledgeable enough to tell me about these things. I’ll be 50 years young Sunday and I’m still enjoying the thrill of learning!
Do you think that the Big Bang proves the existence of a Creator or not?
Your love and enthusiasm for whatever you are discussing really shines through in your videos. It's infectious and I hang on every word. Thank you so much for making and sharing these videos.
It's fun to be excited to learn from someone who really loves the subject matter.
Gotta remember talking to folks through a camera lens and as a teacher requires a fair bit of acting. Not to say her performance isn't convincing. It is. But it is still a performance. No matter what the payoff may be.
@@piehound What's your reason for pointing that out? Everyone 'performs' when they speak into a camera or even pose for a photo. Most people aren't great - or at least aren't totally comfortable - doing it. And most people are only able to offer up a version of themselves as the 'performance' (which is why there are so few truly great actors). Why do you think we gotta remember it's acting as we enjoy the information she is communicating? What difference does it make?
This is a great video to get you thinking….
It’s interesting that we as humans always want an end to the universe, an edge. What’s beyond it?
Actually it being infinite makes more sense.
Why are we obsessed with it ending or having an edge? Easier to accept that it’s infinite and expanding into its infinity
You are right.
It feels sad when the end of the Universe will be dark, cold and thin, like the emptiness.
I used to run an astronomy club at a high school many years ago. One of the things I used to do, was to come up with hypothetical concepts and get the kids to debate the validity of the concept using scientific notions. One of these was, what if all of the matter in the universe is still in the same "position" it was when the big bang happened, and its the "distance" between them that is stretching like an elastic being pulled at a constant rate. What if the only way to travel between nodes was along the ever expanding elastic. From the first points point of view, the distance to the nodes is growing exponentially faster the further you look down the line of elastics, yet it is constant in relation to each other.
My favourite answer to "What is it expanding into?" is "It's just making it up as it goes along."
Something I like to think about is how we tend to look as far back as we can and say that at some point all of this must have been one infinitely small, infinitely dense point and we like to look as far forward as we can and say that the universe can't expand further than that. Back at the point in time we think of as the big bang there may have been people saying the exact same about what we think of as the present. At the point in time that we call the big freeze there will probably be people having the same sort of conversation. When I tell people that they tend to think negatively about the idea, feeling that there's no point in continuing to ask those questions. I prefer to take a page out of Dr. Tyson's book, I don't think it's pointless and it doesn't make me feel small, it makes me feel conected across time to the deep past and the infinite future, I find it comforting to know that thoughts and ideas and knowledge and the pursuit of knowledge are eternal and unrelenting. In my opinion it is at once both humbling and a huge privilege to be part of that eternal quest for knowing and understanding.
It wouldn't surprise me if the universe expands back to where it began. Something like an MC Escher stairwell.
Do you think that the Big Bang proves the existence of a Creator or not?
It is reverse evolving into the Solid State Entity
@@mohamedanan7726 I don't know if it proves it... what I do know is, it doesn't disprove it. Both
Science and the Bible say that in the beginning there was a formless void and darkness*... and the missing factor for the BB to take place, could have very well been God.
*Or formless darkness, which would also describe a shapeless void with no form, substance, edge, beginning or end.
Science says that before the Big Bang there was nothing or what can be understood as a void... a void without form, edge, beginning or end. That to me describes the emptiness which the Universe is expanding into. To me the difference between interstellar or intergalactic space and the initial void is that the Void was absolutely empty, and beyond the Universe it still is completely empty, while the spacial Universe has atoms of atmospheric gases and possibly of other elements, plus the energy which Science calls Zero Point Energy. That tells me the Universe can eternally expand into the emptiness of the void.
When I took physics in the late '60s, the most popular theories concerning the universe were as follows: 1. The steady-state universe. Matter was being created in the center of the universe, pushing existing matter toward of the edge, where it just "disappeared," like water going over a waterfall. 2. The ceaselessly expanding universe that kept expanding without end, & therefore had no boundary, or else a boundary that kept growing. 3. The pulsating universe, where matter expanded until the expansion was slowed and finally stopped by gravitation, which then began to collapse toward a central point, where it reached critical mass, and caused another big bang. I thought of this model as the "chicken-heart" universe.
BTW, not everything is going away from each other. The Andromeda galaxy is headed for an ultimate collision with our own, and the Hubble Telescope has captured images of many other galaxies that have collided, or are about to collide. Keep in mind that sophisticated science is in its infancy. Evolution affects not only animals, but also cosmic forces. Remember, too, that what we are now examining are MODELS, and models give the best explanation of observable phenomena, which are always subject to change.
That was something I've always wondered about. If everything is expanding and moving away from each other how can a Galaxy be heading for us? Do you have a way of explaining it to me?
@@your_average_joe5781 asks: "If everything is expanding and moving away from each other how can a Galaxy be heading for us? Do you have a way of explaining it to me?" ....... The way astronomers have explained it, nearly everything in the universe has a Doppler red-shift, which means that those observed objects are heading AWAY from us. Hence, if everything is moving away, the universe must be expanding. However, the Andromeda galaxy is blue-shifted, which means it is headed TOWARD us, which means that it will collide with the Milky Way some millions of years from now. Nothin' to worry about. I believe in science, but as a believer in scientific method, I question much of what science teaches. Science corrects itself; religion does not.
@@wittwittwer1043 The part of why Andromeda is gravitationally attracted to our Milky Way has been answered by science without gods of or other magics. The part that the Universe at distances larger than Andromeda to is is expanding has been answered too although it's not quite as intuitive as an explosion within a defined space. The part that the expansion rate of speed accelerates with the distances is not understood. We are talking about billions of light years away, not our back yard Andromeda. Still, no evidence of gods, we just don't know. Lack of knowledge. No need to replace lack of knowledge with gods and magic. We don't know is just fine.
@@fotticelli wrote in part: The part of why Andromeda is gravitationally attracted to our Milky Way has been answered by science without gods of or other magics. ....... I reread my original post, and didn't see any mention of religion or magic.
I'm what conservative "christians" like to scorn as a "secular humanist," a designation that I embrace. However, one quote I often use is this: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. -Arthur C Clarke
@@wittwittwer1043 unless I somehow missed it you never answered Your-Average-Joe's question.
I love that you actually site sources in the video and the description or bring in experts into the videos. I think this is one of my new favorite educational channels
I always had the theory that the universe expanding is kinda like the fusion of elements in the sense that the expanding is overcoming the force of gravity which would be like fusion overcoming the force of the bound particles and eventually like a star producing iron that is so tightly bound the energy can’t escape and space expanding would eventually collapse under the force of gravity and basically make the universe shrink and then the “Big Bang” would happen again creating a universe the same but slightly different. Kinda like putting drops of food coloring in karo syrup mixing it together and then unmixing it like how the action lab did in his video.
That's nothing new. The cyclic universe hypothesis was long considered a probable scenario, but very unlikely given recent discoveries like the ever increasing rate of expansion of the current universe, most likely being fueled by negative gravity of space itself. As it expands more of this "dark energy" is generated, since dark energy is fixed proportional to the amount of space. The question really is whether we end with heat death or a Big Rip.
I love the enthusiasm of these youngsters… as a now-retired (well, “semi-retired”) boffin who started out much the same way. I hope they enjoy the adventure of living and thinking as much as I did!
Do you think that the Big Bang proves the existence of a Creator or not?
10:05: WHAT CREDIBLE SCI-UA-camR just proclaims 'We will never know'? WTF?
@@mohamedanan7726 no.
@@TRDiscordian The universe is just a creature, not eternal like God
@@mohamedanan7726 There is the pantheism argument. It says that only God can be infinite. If we claim that the universe is infinite, then God and the universe are in fact, one.
Can we think of expansion as the deepening of space?
Like diving in a fractal.
Like increased resolution in a picture.
Like a stone carved in a statue.
(More surface)
Like a bud being split in a leaves
Like an embryo where cells are killed to detach the fingers from each other.
How does that feel?
There are actually a few spiral nebulae. If you've got a binary star and one of them is ejecting mass like crazy (dying ~Sun-mass star, or a Wolf-Rayet) the motion of the stars can lead to material getting bunched up as the star orbits, and then moving outwards at a constant speed. That gives you an Archimedes spiral, like LL Pegasi.
The problem I have with some of this is that as we move around the sun, the sun is moving through the universe. Our solar system is not static, it is moving. So, how much of what we see as moving is really how it looks as WE move through the universe in our own solar system?
I think it's important that we are careful when educating others on scientific discoveries that we don't come across as dogmatic. I remember growing up loving astronomy and cosmology only to discover that much of what I was being taught was only partially true, or kinda true, or not true at all, and that our current models are just the best we have. It's a wonderful thing to tell children that we know very little about the universe and that they can become scientist one day that can help us add to this growing knowledge.
"we don't come across as dogmatic."
How about catmatic?
Wild being reminded of some of this stuff. The raisin bread simile, Father Lamaitre, the universe not actually starting from a single point....Very cool to go down memory lane with all of this as you guys walk through this gorgeous environment.
Do you think that the Big Bang proves the existence of a Creator or not?
@@mohamedanan7726 No idea.
It's not a proof, it's just a suggestion. Something to think about 👍
Hi, Dianna!…great job! Thank you. LeMaître is pronounced luh-MET-ruh. In the first and last syllables, the “uh” is pronounced like the double “o” in the word “look.” So, the first syllable of his last name is pronounced exactly like “look”, but without the “k”. Then we have “met” (just like in English), followed by the word “rook,” but without the “k”.
So enthusiastic and thoughtful. Thank you. I never thought I would listen to such discussions carried out by a genius in a fun hat. It would be great to hike and discuss these things. Always interesting.
I love the excitement she shows when explaining. Makes it very interesting.
And got more exciting when her friend ended up with more questions. :-D
The joke at the end (I loled) relates to a question I started to think about, would the pre-expansion universe be a place where everything is the same which results in time not existing and the expansion is the thing which allows change to happen thus creating time.
In relativity time doesn't require change-- it's just a dimension. You could have a spacetime in which nothing changed. It so happens that everything in the universe has a very steep entropy gradient (because the BB has such low entropy) which underlies the behaviour of a lot of things, including ourselves, and that's what causes everything to change all the time, and us with it, giving rise to the experience of time. There are some speculative ideas that turn this around (Verlinde Entropic Gravity). Ofc nobody knows the answer but it is worth thinking about time from the standpoint of relativity and why that means it makes sense to think of it as an actual dimension, not just as some kind of abstraction of the idea of things changing.
@@benc8386 you dont understand relitivety....in relativity time DOES change. it changes according to the observer, and the closer you get to the speed of light....the slower time goes...relativity explicitly dictates that time is relative
time is VERY SIMPLE - time is...... moving particles - and moving particles are....... TEMPERATURE - basically at REAL ZERO Kelvin time STOPS
I guess that depends on your view of time and whether there was quantum foam and fluctuations going on then, like some of them say goes on in empty space now. But since there would be no entropy cause everything is uniform except for random jitters, time wouldn't have a direction.
@@chefmarcg I didn't mean that time is *absolute* (like in a Newton-Cartan spacetime). You are correct that in relativity people's clocks will go at different rates and that simultaneity is relative. My point is none of that requires any matter to be doing anything.
Hmm... It kinda reminds me of infinite convergence in calculus. Like we used to think that the universe converges infinitely close together (single point), but it sounds like it infinitely diverges towards a single point before the expansion.
My take on this (an uneducated take, but not knowing anything about a subject has never before prevented me from talking about it at great length, and it's not about to start anytime soon), is that it seems to me that space does not occupy space. You don't need a pre-existing space in which to put space. You wouldn't peel away space to reveal another space beneath it. If you already had the space in which to put your new space, you wouldn't need the new space, you'd already have space. Space is the phenomenon we observe which allows movement and occupation in 3 dimensions (maybe more, maybe not, but that's another topic). Space brings it's own accommodation with it. If you've got the space, then you've got the space you need for the space. There is no "3 inches to the left of space". There is no outside to space. "Outside" is a spatial reference and so could not be applied to something that was not in space. Space is a purely internal phenomenon. WARNING: TERRIBLE ANALOGY UP AHEAD. If you increase the price of something from £1 to £2, you don't need a "price vacuum" into which the price will expand. You just get more "price"!
"Here we are in our universe" is somehow more impactful and nuanced when she says it in the woods rather than the office. 🙂
Learning science has never been this relaxing! 😌🔭
Hey happy birthday by the way! Great video as always!
The answers we have found have just raised a whole new set of questions, in some ways we are as confused as ever, but I believe we are confused at a higher level and about more important things.
As I see the similarities in atoms and galaxies, I ponder our concept of what we consider to be our universe. Could our universe just be a giant firecracker that has exploded at some giant’s celebration? Are our galaxies just atoms of a giant molecule? Are our molecules really galaxies of a smaller universe?
Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
I also wonder the same minus the firecracker part.
@@RosequartzDivination G’day, Rosequartz. As someone who has roamed in the outdoors since I was 3, and have been fascinated with science almost as long, and having a creative imagination - it’s not a big jump at all. It seems that a lot of others should be asking similar questions.
Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
We live on Earth's surface just like there is microflora and fauna on our skin and inside our bodies. So if its endless towards small, it's endlessnes scales up exponentially.
@@RosequartzDivination BINGO!
Courtesy of Half Vast Flying
These are the same questions I ask myself.
Your teaching method is gentle and invites inquiry. I feel welcomed to the conversation.
Over the last few days I have been watching a bunch of UA-camrs debating whether electricity flows in wires. They use terms like “the lies you’ve been told”, etc. The common denominator is they shut down questions.
Well, they invite “challenges” if you want to think of yourself as a member of their club (so much so that a Doctor of Optical Physics felt he needed to start his video with a “not my field” disclaimer!) But they gloss over very real and valid questions by the everyday people they claim to want to reach.
You are the opposite. Like Mr Rogers, you address the worthiness question right up front. We deserve a seat at the table. This video is a perfect example.
I thought of posting this as a complaint on their pages, but then I thought, “who out there is different?”, and I decided my energy may be better spent encouraging you, instead.
Also the hat is awesome.
I just turned 65 recently and I've been pondering the question of whether or not there's an edge to the universe since I was a youth . I've always thought it has to be infinite and now that we know the universe is expanding if were an edge the universe,
With the state of our planet right now, I'm not surprised the entire universe is trying to distance itself from us.
The most interesting part to me is the inflationary epoch which was from 10^(-36) to 10^(-32) seconds after the Big Bang, where the universe underwent exponential growth and then suddenly slowed down. This neatly explains a lot of observable coincidences, e.g. how today the cosmic microwave background is "too" uniform across every direction. The thing is, we have absolutely no idea what caused it.
“Absolutely no idea” -> this is not true. Scientists have many ideas to explain this. Not proven ideas, but saying they have absolutely nothing is an insultz
From 10^(-36) to 10^(-32) is a minimum duration to explain the flatness of the universe that we see. The duration could have been much longer, vastly long even, and it might still be ongoing far away from us (called eternal inflation). In the eternal case there is no "after the [cold] Big Bang" that kicked off the inflationary epoch. Or there may have been a stable near eternity of nothingness that suddenly nucleated a bubble setting off the inflationary epoch. We only know with high certainty that there must have been a 'hot big bang' that ended the inflationary epoch.
@@juzoli I don't know if it's an insult, but it's definitely hyperbolic. It would be more accurate to say we don't know, potentially can't know, if it even happened or what caused it. It's a smexy idea because a number of good conjectures that resolve a number of vexing issues with our understanding of the universe just fall out of it.
@@samgordon9756 Again, scientists ALREADY have many great ideas about this, and working on how to prove that at least one of them is correct.
I've always figured that the universe is expanding because it's trying to achieve equilibrium. In other words, all the matter in the universe is trying to evenly space itself out. I think this inflationary epoch seems to align with this idea if you consider things like pressure or electrons repelling each other.
The higher the pressure in an area the faster it will travel to an area of lower pressure. And with the electron idea: The closer an electron is to another electron the stronger the repelling forces between the electron are. If this, or something similar is happening with all matter in the universe then it would make sense that when it was all close together it would expand faster, then slow down as the distance between each other increases.
Dianna, once again, you approach an unknowable topic , answer one questions and generate ten more. Just like a true scientist. Thank you for this fascinating topic. I may have to sign-up my grandkids for the week science club.
3:21 The article in question... Lowell Observatory, Bulletin No. 58... the spiral nebula, if I understood correctly, is Andromeda, -300Km. should be understood as -300Km/s otherwise it is not a velocity but a distance, and the conclusion of this article says Andromeda is approaching the Earth at a speed of 300Km/s, not moving away from Earth...
Most scientific theories are influenced by perception and perception can be deceptive. Just because something makes sense and can be deduced doesn't mean that it is true. That's the part that science tends to forget.
Its so nice because we're watching someone being taught and not just straight to ourselves, it seems like we're the third person and that makes it interesting and more engaging and fun
I don't know if I can take the cuteness of those fluffy hat puffs!!! 😍
Physics + Diana in hat puffs = the best way to learn!!
Yeh, Dianna is cuddly in an angular sort of way. I also feel like she hasn't aged much since 2013, or whenever she started this channel.
"The observation of all sky objects moving away from us" has "equality pattern" with "the observation that every morning the sun rises at east and every early evening the sun sinks at west" which was considered that the sun to encirle the Earth long time ago
I love and learn so much from your videos and I’m 61yrs old!
Le Maître - pronounced le metre- as in “metra”-nome, metronome.
Definitely one of the more thought provoking videos you’ve released in a while Diana! Good stuff, and a great little primer for curious young minds... 👍
Great at teaching young minds what stupidity is
@@MrYoshirx7 I think you miss the entire point of not only this video, but her channel altogether... But that’s quite alright. Each to their own.
@@MikeOxlong- 🤣🤣🤣🤣I think U miss the point on intellect, doesn't seem U have any if ur defending someone who's intentionally dumbing down society to line her pockets. Ur a joke to mate hope on
@@MrYoshirx7 you’re broken beyond all hope... sorry, you can’t be helped. It is a pity.
@@MikeOxlong- 🐑🐑🐑🐑 sheep statements 101 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Awesome video, and great explanations. I love how at the end of the video he says "I have more questions now than before" and that answer seems to have made you so happy!
By everywhere does that mean each point expands independently, or is expansion all points at the same time? Does faster expansion from afar mean a slowing down of the expansion rate, if everything viewed from afar is an earlier period in time or is this due to scale/something else? Does time have any significance on the expansion rate? Is there a variance to this expansion rate? Is it significant to the distance in time or constant when viewed from different places? If it were a distance basis would two different points from the same radial distance (also observing from two different points too) be observed with the same expansion rate? Would two different viewing locations at the same time from the same point give the same rate (with both starting points sharing the same distance and two points having different distances)?
Amazing that someone can talk so fast about concepts and possibilities that it would take me a few weeks to even grasp the possible meaning of ….but sounds very exciting !
I have always felt that our universe’s beginning occurred much like a program, being loaded onto a server. Before the Big Bang there was no space nor time.
Then once it was loaded suddenly everything exploded out of nothing. Much similar to a program, rather than something material.
That makes me wonder about the simulation theory.
Love your explanations and passion!
Is it like the ripples in a pond when a rock is dropped into the middle of it? The ripples appear to move faster away from the center the further out they are from the center.
this is explained pretty well so its nice to finally be able to watch a complicated video and be able to understand it
No way did you understand the implications of an infinite universe. It is metaphysically absurd to believe in a universe of infinite past events. That means everything that could happen has happened and everything that has happened will happen again.
When I started programing computers, the concept of NULL was foreign to me. It was only when I learned indirect addressing did it all make sense. The fact that you could "point" to a memory location and find a value there makes sense. It's like looking out into the universe at a certain location and seeing a galaxy or maybe, you don't see anything at all because that location in space is empty. The programming equivalent is to point to a register at a specific memory location and see a value, even if that value is zero. The idea of NULL is that, even the location you're looking for is not defined yet. It's not that the location has nothing in it. It's that the location doesn't yet exist.
The location may exist but you just can't access it one reason is that there may be other dimensions. Right?
You must be a database guy. To me as a C programmer NULL is 0, and for all practical purposes the opposite of an uninitialized value.
@@eljanrimsa5843 Then you must be a C programmer and not a C++ programmer. In C++ we have something called "instantiating". It makes new objects appear out of nowhere. It's like the Criss Angel of programming.
@@markfabre7682 But we don't use the symbol NULL for "uninstantiated". NULL in C/C++ is just another name for the value 0.
@@eljanrimsa5843 While I agree that NULL is a machine specific constant of zero, it would be poor form to use it in a C++ program, especially in a base zero array element. Of course, an array pointer is an offset within an array and not an absolute memory address. Now my head hurts.
I really love your enthusiasm. It is one thing to have a profession, but to love it reflects through your ideology and explanations. Thank you for being you and showing us the wonders of the universe. If I were to say one word describing this video, it would be 'impressive'.
On a side note, I suffer from a disease, I term, contrarianism. Being a conceptual individual, I have a need to see things with my mind's eye. I really like the raisin bread ideology, but cannot shake the thought, what if matter is shrinking into space? For instance, I can more easily see gravitational lensing if the massive object, between the viewed object, shrinks into space allowing the distant object to be seen. I know this does not fit the general interpretation of relativity, but I cannot seem to shake it. Regardless, thank you for your inspirational videos and hard work.
I’m 53. And today My mind was blown away that there was not A Big Bang.
Was always waiting for some to find that portion of spare where things are moving away from.
Annnnnnd my head hurts much like your editors probably does.
1)what evidence do we have of other dimensions? Of other universes?
2)our universe expanding into nothing makes the most sense due to what is capable of being observed
3)how can we tell the difference between something shrinking vs it moving away when we only have our own very limited perspective?
4)is it possible that gravity is distorting our perception of things that are "further away"? If so, how do we account for that in our observations?
Edit: I'm watching while drinking, but these are the questions that come to mind at the moment... Could be I'm forgetting something else I've learned in the past, or not completely understanding... It's alot to wrap your head around 😅
Thank you Physics Girl. Physics and Cosmology is so inspiring, but for me the most interesting are the philosophical implications of what we found since Einstein, Lorentz, Bohr Hubble, Pauli, Heisenberg etc.
I was useless at Physics and Maths at school (and still am) but recently I can't stop reading and trying to learn more about these things. I was inspired by you dealing with whether the question of what the universe is expanding into and saying that it is somewhat meaningless, as this implies some external region of Spacetime?
Einstein's Spacetime as we know it, we now think comes into existence primarily as a result of Inflation. But 'before' Inflation the Planck limits on Spacetime time; Planck length (ie when the universe was less than 10 -43 sec 'old') and Planck length (when the universe was less than 10-35 of a meter in 'size') surely there could have been no concept of Spacetime as we understand it, therefore no Time Zero (and as you said therefore no singularity)? Some talk of a quantum limit with loops, branes and strings, but the Planck limit is even smaller than the quantum world by a very significant amount. Somewhere I read that what seemed like a good analogy, that the universe is like the inner surface of a 4 dimensional balloon? Anyway they say a little knowledge is dangerous and this is really just a question so I'll stop there lol. But thanks again - great stuff.
I'd like to think she always has a camera person following her in case she has an existential crisis.
"What did it expand from" is a more interesting question... If it expands, then it is definite & I believe finite. Defined in terms of the space and time it took up. So, could it really expand from infinity?... if "infinity" is define-able is it infinity any more?
Big Bang holds because it caters for both the expansion theorem as well as the fact that what is expanding isn't infinite, but just infinitely defined into a singularity of space & time. The presupposed beginning of time.
If so to stretch the theorem,
Holds well also against the records of creation.
That once there was nothing
And from nothing came something, as caused by an Infinite Being outside of the definitions of space and time.
So the infinity may as well have been outside the universe, as you've correctly stated
But the universe itself expands not into itself, but from a finite definition into an infinite non-defined infinity, outside of space & time.
Truly conceptually mind boggling to say the least
it could be infinite and also expand. Mathematical example: natural numbers are infinite. They are: 1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ,5.... and so on, infinitely. Now imagine you 'expand' them. add one number in between each: 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, ... it's still infinite, but now "bigger"
The thing about the paper trail. The German government does not have a centralized bureaucracy or archive. If you as person do not have all the documents you have to go to all the administrations and collect them by yourself. So Collecting them beforehand is important. And they are all in paper and not digital, to conform with the privacy laws. The people are overly cautious with it because in the end they can be made personally accountable for leaked information. Compared to digital data, printed documents are hard to copy, to search and to transport.