What a fantastic interview! I do wish the interviewer would have stopped crossing his arms, but the questions were insightful and I think he got the best from Professor Lord Rees. Anyway, I’ve just found NS on UA-cam and have already watched a fair few videos. The bonus is that a lot of the videos are short and sweet, so I’m able to catch up quickly. However, I’m glad this one was longer. Keep up the great work.
Martin Rees has such detailed responses here that even musicians can make sense of his answers! ...I've loved his talks with Robert Lawrence Kuhn on CtT, Martin's manner reminds me of Sir Patrick Moore. Really liked watching this upload, thanks!
A theory I have about the big bang is - that black holes, a part of the matter that goes into them gets pulled out of space-time and in that process, vents back at 0 time at coordinates 0,0,0. This happens with all black holes over the length of the Universes's life and in effect - all the matter may eventually end up suddenly appearing in one spot in space and time - the beginning of time and all in the same spot. That would yield the Big Bang. So with that, the Universe gives birth to itself. But it's just a theory that I'm still trying to disprove. Maybe we will one day account for all the matter that goes into a black hole, and with that - disprove this fully. But then maybe we may find that to be the case that some matter that is in a black hole gets ripped out of space and time. As for dark matter - how much that played in shaping the Universe today as we know it is another interesting study. Though the thought that will carry on lingering (having solved the chicken and egg) is what came first - the Universe or Time?
Dark matter and dark energy cannot be measured directly. But the motion of visible matter can be measured. If general relativity were correct there would be no such thing as these invisible forces. The only reason why the terms were introduced is because general relativity failed to explain the motion of an estimated 95% of all the matter in the universe. That's 24% of all the dwarf galaxies and stars and 71.6% of all the galaxies moving away from each other. So they said there must be 94.6% more things in the universe that are missing, causing the motion to all the visible matter in the universe. Not that there is anything truly missing in the universe only general relativity is unable to explain it. They are bullheaded insisting that general relativity is right even though it is unable to explain the motion of about 94.6% of all the visible matter in the universe. In reality the percentage is pushing it. The real number is around 99.86%. Then instead of saying general relativity is wrong by 94.6% they say there is missing energy and missing matter. Because in order for the equations of general relativity to match observations lots of mass and energy have to be added to the equations, around 99.89% to be precise. Simply put, if general relativity was right they wouldn't have to rely on things they can't prove. I worked as a professional 3D CAD architect using relative and polar Cartesian coordinates for input, (x,y,z)°. I understand Einstein's equations describing warped spacetime, (x,y,z,t). Try to create a landscape mesh that accurately represents a 100 acre parcel of land. It's about the same thing. Take points in 3D space and connect lines, arcs, and curves along elv marks. It reveals the contours of the land. The same exact thing can be done to map out mass and the strength of gravity between other mass. It's actually easier mapping points between 2 spheres than it is to map out 100 acres of hills, valleys and a creek. Anyways, I was able to figure out the missing variables causing the accelerated rotational curve with the galactic disk pinned on dark matter. I just published 2 books a few days ago called DARK MATTER: What's Wrong With General Relativity? by Ron Kemp in both hardcover and paperback versions. It's only $12.25 USD. Last year I published a 6 part series of books on gravity called Secret Universe by Ron Kemp.
Interesting question- did man really go to the moon? Survive all the extreme radiation and the pressure of vacuum to get there and back safely in a spaceship made of tin foil? And with such nondescript technology? An iPhone would be more successful in sending a man to the moon than the NASA computers in 1969. What do you think?
His expertees is mathematical astronomy. I have communicated with Martin Rees on the human popn problem and problems we are causing the planet. He statement ""that our Century is Special because me can determine the future of life on Earth"", is misguided. He should stick to his expertees and stay out of biology.
Great interview. I love Martin's open minded, yet realistic views on the future of science and life more generally.
He's not realistic at all. Some things he says are misguided and poorly informed.
What a fantastic interview! I do wish the interviewer would have stopped crossing his arms, but the questions were insightful and I think he got the best from Professor Lord Rees.
Anyway, I’ve just found NS on UA-cam and have already watched a fair few videos. The bonus is that a lot of the videos are short and sweet, so I’m able to catch up quickly. However, I’m glad this one was longer. Keep up the great work.
Welcome aboard. And thanks for the feedback. Keep watching!
@@NewScientist. Thank you. I look forward to watching more.
amazing interview, martin is so inspiring to young scientist.
Thank you for this wonderful interview! Great questions and answers, and as always, Lord Martin is an inspiring and effective science communicator :-)
Martin Rees has such detailed responses here that even musicians can make sense of his answers! ...I've loved his talks with Robert Lawrence Kuhn on CtT, Martin's manner reminds me of Sir Patrick Moore. Really liked watching this upload, thanks!
Such an interesting man, always good to hear him talk.
A favorite! Thaks
A theory I have about the big bang is - that black holes, a part of the matter that goes into them gets pulled out of space-time and in that process, vents back at 0 time at coordinates 0,0,0. This happens with all black holes over the length of the Universes's life and in effect - all the matter may eventually end up suddenly appearing in one spot in space and time - the beginning of time and all in the same spot. That would yield the Big Bang. So with that, the Universe gives birth to itself.
But it's just a theory that I'm still trying to disprove. Maybe we will one day account for all the matter that goes into a black hole, and with that - disprove this fully. But then maybe we may find that to be the case that some matter that is in a black hole gets ripped out of space and time.
As for dark matter - how much that played in shaping the Universe today as we know it is another interesting study.
Though the thought that will carry on lingering (having solved the chicken and egg) is what came first - the Universe or Time?
Keep us up to date. I’d really like to hear how your tests get on, Paul.
Good concept.
Entrevista increíble con el
doctor Martín Rees. Gracias por compartir a este brillante y legendario
científico.
If I have half the consciousness mind like Mr MR at his age I will be a happy man
❤️🌹
👍
Dark matter and dark energy cannot be measured directly. But the motion of visible matter can be measured. If general relativity were correct there would be no such thing as these invisible forces. The only reason why the terms were introduced is because general relativity failed to explain the motion of an estimated 95% of all the matter in the universe. That's 24% of all the dwarf galaxies and stars and 71.6% of all the galaxies moving away from each other. So they said there must be 94.6% more things in the universe that are missing, causing the motion to all the visible matter in the universe. Not that there is anything truly missing in the universe only general relativity is unable to explain it. They are bullheaded insisting that general relativity is right even though it is unable to explain the motion of about 94.6% of all the visible matter in the universe. In reality the percentage is pushing it. The real number is around 99.86%. Then instead of saying general relativity is wrong by 94.6% they say there is missing energy and missing matter. Because in order for the equations of general relativity to match observations lots of mass and energy have to be added to the equations, around 99.89% to be precise. Simply put, if general relativity was right they wouldn't have to rely on things they can't prove.
I worked as a professional 3D CAD architect using relative and polar Cartesian coordinates for input, (x,y,z)°. I understand Einstein's equations describing warped spacetime, (x,y,z,t). Try to create a landscape mesh that accurately represents a 100 acre parcel of land. It's about the same thing. Take points in 3D space and connect lines, arcs, and curves along elv marks. It reveals the contours of the land. The same exact thing can be done to map out mass and the strength of gravity between other mass. It's actually easier mapping points between 2 spheres than it is to map out 100 acres of hills, valleys and a creek. Anyways, I was able to figure out the missing variables causing the accelerated rotational curve with the galactic disk pinned on dark matter. I just published 2 books a few days ago called DARK MATTER: What's Wrong With General Relativity? by Ron Kemp in both hardcover and paperback versions. It's only $12.25 USD. Last year I published a 6 part series of books on gravity called Secret Universe by Ron Kemp.
Interesting question- did man really go to the moon? Survive all the extreme radiation and the pressure of vacuum to get there and back safely in a spaceship made of tin foil? And with such nondescript technology? An iPhone would be more successful in sending a man to the moon than the NASA computers in 1969. What do you think?
Wish he was my neighbour . Pop round for a cup of tea .
His expertees is mathematical astronomy. I have communicated with Martin Rees on the human popn problem and problems we are causing the planet. He statement ""that our Century is Special because me can determine the future of life on Earth"", is misguided. He should stick to his expertees and stay out of biology.
Absurdity