What's outside the universe? | Sean Carroll and Lex Fridman
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 кві 2024
- Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: • Sean Carroll: General ...
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
- HiddenLayer: hiddenlayer.com/lex
- Cloaked: cloaked.com/lex and use code LexPod to get 25% off
- Notion: notion.com/lex
- Shopify: shopify.com/lex to get $1 per month trial
- NetSuite: netsuite.com/lex to get free product tour
GUEST BIO:
Sean Carroll is a theoretical physicist, author, and host of Mindscape podcast.
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
SOCIAL:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Reddit: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman - Наука та технологія
Full podcast episode: ua-cam.com/video/tdv7r2JSokI/v-deo.html
Lex Fridman podcast channel: ua-cam.com/users/lexfridman
Guest bio: Sean Carroll is a theoretical physicist, author, and host of Mindscape podcast.
If we encounter something outside of “the Universe”, then that logically becomes part of the expanded definition of the Universe itself, by definition. The Universe is the complete description of everything.
Thats not true, not according to the inflation level 2 multiverse models, get your facts straight warrior. Those universes would be completely isolated. What you're talking about is known as the eternal return model (level 1 multiverse)
What did the universe expand into?
@@atimetraveler4910 I guess THCV4 is speaking of the universe as the totality of all that can be known to exist, not of speculative multiverses which may or may not exist.
It seems to me that we should agree on the definition of the universe as the totality of everything that exists. We should come up with other terms for things that are subsets of that… such as the observable universe or many worlds other than what we experience or other dimensions … And as long as I’m being presumptuous 😊 - we should admit that the universe is likely infinite and that is more than likely impossible to comprehend. But we should still try😊.
What is harder to comprehend. The finite or the infinite?
Depends upon who you ask. I could be wrong, but it seems that most people have more difficulty with the idea of an infinite universe than a finite one. I'd bet my shirt on infinity, based on nothing more than what seems reasonable and comprehensible to me personally.
I finally figured out what’s “outside our universe”, after thinking about it for 28 years. And it gave me forever peace.
Consider the taught experiment: Imagine our universe as just one 3D slice of an immense 4D world (analogy of a sheet 2d slice of a 3d cube but at the next level). The universe didn't merely expand from a point, but dimensionally-it evolved from a point (0D), into a line (1D), spread into a plane (2D), and unfolded into the three-dimensional space we experience. But here’s the twist: it likely continued into a fourth dimension, beyond our observation. This explains why we can't see where the universe is expanding from-it's occurring in a dimension we don't perceive. What's more, the probability that we live in the original 3D slice formed at the start of this expansion is infinitesimally small. We are likely just one of countless 3D slices in a 4D cosmos, each experiencing its own version of reality! And the unfolding did not stop at 4D.
In our vast universe, imagine that what we experience as three-dimensional space is just one of many 3D 'slices' within a larger 4D cosmos. Particularly at the quantum level, these slices don't exist in isolation; they intersect. At every tiny point where these 3D worlds meet, quantum phenomena occur. This intersection explains the statistical nature of quantum mechanics, as each slice may experience different quantum events, contributing to the overall probabilities we observe. It's like multiple realities overlapping at points so small, they're governed by the laws of quantum physics. This model provides a unique perspective on how quantum mechanics might operate within a higher-dimensional space, suggesting that what we observe as randomness and superposition might actually be the result of simultaneous, intersecting realities at the quantum scale.
that s a long time confirmed. Everybody knows it.
I can't wait for a day off so that I can kick back and watch this episode. This is going to be good. Thank you, Lex!!!!
Clearly what's outside the universe is packing peanuts
OMG! We only have this one Universe to exist in, and we can't leave?!! My claustrophobia is kicking in!
where can i fit my train collection now?!
Nah there are multiple universes so dont sweat it. If you get too claustrophobic in this one you can just pop over to another one, Elons rocket will get you there in no time. Godspeed.
We're not in a universe, we're part of the universe. Enmeshed and entangled with it.
If the Sun were the size of a quarter, the next closest star would be 10 miles away. Don't worry, there is plenty of room!
Everything too big we have been calling it “infinite”. The ancient sailors from Greece, Scandinavia, and the Polynesia believed the sea was “never ending”. Some Native American tribes believed that the land was infinite. We humans have a bias to believe that big things that are beyond our perception must be infinite.
I like to imagine space is infinitely large and infinitely small. I think it’s entirely possible there’s infinitely smaller particles that we will never be capable of seeing, galaxies and universes beneath our fingertips that’s we are completely blind to. Surrounded by infinity at every scale.
This. I imagine even our own known universe is a particle in a much grander and much more larger series of universes.
Why should there be a starting point in time to the universe? That things should start at some point in time is only a human expectation. Also, why should the universe be finite in size? It is important either not to make tacit assumptions in asking such questions or to make clear that these assumptions are being made while asking these questions. If these assumptions do not hold good for the universe, the questions just melt away.
Sounds like a plan. We'll let the question melt away. It'll save time better seeking answers to questions that can be answered.
Entirely possible there are multiple universes. Think about an ocean and rain drops falling on the ocean. Each drop of rain is a universe , forever expanding in a ripple wave effect. You were randomly born into this rain drop for whatever reason. Nobody asked you for permission to be here. You just appeared and will disappear in the future . To quote Blade Runner : “ … like tears in the rain “
Time for a drink now lol
Drinky drinky lulz
It is either infinite, or there is an outside to somewhere else... but then that something else is either infinite or has an outside to something else,.... ♾️♾️♾️
If there's nothing outside our universe, then what it is expanding into and through?
Into the good old vacuum?
There are interesting UA-cam discussions about that. Not necessarily edifying, but interesting :)
Non existence. The “space” outside the universe simply does not exist. It took me a long time as well to understand that. Just like it did for me to understand how time didn’t exist before the Big Bang. I would think, well there was still “5 seconds til the Big Bang, or 1 year until the bang bang,” even if there was nothing to quantify time it still somehow existed. It did not. Time can’t exist in a place of nonexistence.
The universe is all that exists and it is pointless imagining what’s outside of it.
great question.. The best mainstream cosmologists will tell you nothing but then they backtrack and say well, perhaps higher dimensions. So it’s very likely higher dimensions from what we can surmise as of this point in our evolution. 🤷🏻♂️ One of the greatest questions of all time :)
@@kylebushnell2601 Its nonexistence so yes, nothing. It literally doesn’t exist. Only the universe exists. As far as we know. And the universe is expanding. Into what? There is no what. There is only the universe. As far as we know.
We are here to experience. We shouldn't take others or ourselves too seriously. We should try our best and let go of the rest.
No we're here to be curious, if we're just here just for experience what was the point of evolution
@@supriyavemulapati6476 Being curious is an experience.
Evolution is a part of this shared (consensus) reality. It's an aspect of this space with which we experience.
@@supriyavemulapati6476 "what was the point of evolution?". Good question.
(a) Why should evolution have a point?
(b) What point do you think it has?
The answer is 42
My perspective is that there has to be an intelligence outside the universe to even coming up with idea of the universe. Let’s look at the simplest fundamental principles of the universe. Energy and matter can’t be created nor destroyed; they're both constant. Which begs the question: where do they come from? If there’s nothing outside the universe, then where was energy and matter created within the universe? It makes more sense logically that both of them have transformed into our universe. For example, my analogy is that imagine in slow motion a bullet penetrates through a door, transforming matter and momentum to the other side. So, if you observe within the universe and track where the bullet came from, you would always come to a conclusion that the bullet is untraceable because it disappears right at the door hole.
1:43 suspicious😂
If the universe had a beginning, and they do say that. At least a theory or hypothesis.
Then can it have no outside? Can it be infinite?
All these questions are baffling and we won't understand without further information, which we may never get, but I hope we do, with further advanced tech.
If there's an 'in', then there has to be an 'out' right?
Perhaps there is truly no outside of us as beings in relation to a fuller veiwpoint of existence. That we are entangled in this grand infinite tapestry.
Our preception being the limiting factor in easily understanding such a concept?
That we are not beings in a universe but we are the universe.
What contains the universe?
i always have 3 analogies for this: if you throw the dice, and its lets say a 4, and you ask why, most people would have no issue with saying its just a coincidence… so they can easily acknowledge that chance or randomness is an integral feature of our universe… but when you then make the leap to coincidence also being the causal origin of the universe, most people would not want to accept that answer, simply cause it wouldnt sound “profound” enough for them, hence sort of humanizing the question, which doesnt even make any sense at all, because if you look at the universe as a whole, its basically 100% void of any humans, so why exactly should our feelings tell us anything about the probability of a cause for existence? ridiculous
my 2nd analogy is, that maybe the question doesnt even make sense, just like it wouldnt make sense in mathematics to ask what is a any number divided by zero… and we can just never realize that, because we cant look at the universe from the outside, like we can at a mathematical equation
the 3rd one doesnt come from me personally, but instead from einstein, who said that asking what happened before the big bang would be like asking what is north of the north pole
so even if all of these analogies may not be completely satisfying, i am pretty sure thats about as close as we will ever get to an actual answer
the problem of being random is not being not profound enough, the problem is that it actually doesn't make any sense, and here is why
1. So first, it's not even clear where there is something random out there. Out universe obeys certain rules, and while some seem to have some randomness to them (quantum mechanics), they are still not really random. Outcomes of events like throwing dice can EASILY be predicted if you know all the initial conditions and know the rules. At least on a macroscopic level nothing appears to be random, one event is caused by another, so why the universe should suddenly be random itself?
2. If it is random, what does it even mean? It is an obvious fact that you just cannot pick randomly a number between 0 and infinity with a uniform distribution, so if the possibilities are endless how is one of them (my current conscious experience) gets picked? If the possibilities are not endless, then reality has to be somehow finite, which I find problematic: isn't it a bit too restrictive for the pool of existence to be finite? But even if say it is finite, there is still a problem, because if one trusts their memory and of other people, our conscious experience is in fact not random, because each second the follow-up experience is very tightly causally linked to the current one. And if one goes to the point of being born, it's still being causally connected to a sequence of previous events, none of which are random.
3. Let's say there is indeed a finite pool of existence, of size N. Which means when you get born, you will necessarily live one of those N lives. What would that number be? Is it number of humans of earth that ever lived? Number of animals? Number of living beings in the universe? Reality? Are all probabilities equal, if not, why? As we have now a finite set of options, we can reasonably discuss the probabilities within. And very difficult questions arise, because a finite pool of existence implies a probability distribution of being born k-th living being out of N with a probability p(k). So, what exactly is a living being even, what gets in this pool of existence? Is there a clear boundary, like we would count a fly, but nor a virus? What is the probability p(k)? Is it more likely to be born a fly? Why? We can't judge this probabilities based on Earth's life, because it's only one instance of life. So unless we do exactly this, we will need a brand new universal law to describe probability p(k), which would be really hard to find or even verify. And if one wants to get to something, we would have to limit ourselves to Earth and say it is all life there is in entire REALITY. And then, the number N is the total number of living beings on Earth based on some life criteria, and the probability of being me is 1/N, while probability of being a human is M/N, where M is the number of alive humans on earth right now. But also M, and N both change with time, so does it also mean the probability of being me changes? Is it defined then when I am being born, but what exactly is the moment of being born? And if one says that the probability at that time defines the probability through my whole life, it can't be, because then the probability of being myself right now is not 1/N. So then we still need some universal law to keep fixing the probabilities to make sense. And the worst about all it, is the number N, which is now a certain constant of nature, a number more significant than all other constants of the universe. The existence of this number N implies that it is a fundamental property of reality itself. In fact, it would have to be something like N(t) to make any sense, because the number of living beings changes, but that would mean to define a unified time which doesn't make time within the general relativity, or "outside" the universe. Then we will have to say the following: universe is all there is, N(t) is the fundamental property of it, there is a unified time in the universe despite theory of relativity...
We can keep asking more questions, and it would make less and less sense for the universe to be random. If one wants to come up with something like this, we would have to come up with some many things and accept them, that it is just too complicated to be true, and we might just eventually come to a contradiction, because all that description does is raising question after question and giving no answers to anything. So, what is an alternative?
That it is not random. At least, not in a mathematical sense for sure. We just don't see a more general picture right now to see why what is not random appears in a way so random
Except that's completely incorrect -- dice throw's aren't random, they are predicated on gravity, and gravity is very much fixed within specific parameters, so based on the throw, where it lands, and how high it falls, you actually can make predicative measures about it landing on four. In fact, there are people who run such experiments, and physics can in fact predict the number very single time when utilised within predictive frameworks, so no, your analogy doesn't really "humanise" the universe as being random.
Also, most people who have any sort of experience with design mechanisms or engineering will instantly throw out the "randomness" bit simply because you cannot design any logical structure or software using random bits of code or material. EVerything with any sort of stable congruence needs to be expertly designed to adhere to the laws of physics and/or the principles of sound engineering.
In fact, you cannot remake or simulate any part of our current known existence in a computer simulation using "random" code. Any aspect you want to intricately remake and/or simulate down to a detail, must be done with the most expert knowledge and library codebase, which is quite ironic, because if the universe was as random as you say, we should be able to recreate it using random bits and bobs in a simulated environment. Yet, we cannot. Recreation in any format requires near infinitesimal precision. So what does that tell you?
wow that was very long winded answer where you basically said almost nothing.
i didnt say that EVERYTHING in the universe is random, i just said the root cause for its existence could be random, and youre exactly proving my point, because you seem to not want to accept that option as a possible answer, merely because you dont “like” it
and its funny because you say the origin of the universe being random would raise more questions… no it wouldnt, you just dont want to stop there ;)
also you conveniently ignored my other 2 metaphors, because i feel like if you add those 3 together, it quickly becomes obvios that thinking any further about this topic is actually a waste of time
@eb1184 "said almost nothing" but you didn't address any of the points I made. random as an answer is a terrible, because it makes little sense if you think logically a bit deeper, and doesn't explain absolutely anything. thats pretty much just like explaining things with a concept of god, but calling it "random" instead. god is a much better choice though, because at least it doesn't create any inconsistencies if you see it in a certain way, but randomness at least in mathematical sense doesn't really logically work I think, for the reasons mentioned above, and there is more to say about it than just that
alright buddy, then lets just settle for me calling it randomness and you calling it god :) have a nice day!
What if the universe never existed used to keep me up like in 3rd grade it genuinely scared me also to think that if we are the only life in the universe and our world somehow ended then space would just essentially just be dark and cold endlessly. I know planets and other celestial bodies exist but that was just my thought process at the time and it terrified me
Dark and cold to whom?
To go from something to nothing is hard for me to imagine. I think they call it the "heat death". But to ponder the heat death and consider that no one will ever tell a joke again... It's too hard for me to embrace. So I sort of hope something else will happen.
Life or our consciousness appeared once, so it will reappear in some form again even after the world collapse, considering infinity of time...
If there is nothing outside of the universe, how did the big bang happen? That could not have happened from nothing, there had to be something for it to happen.
Watch pleasntville, Reese Witherspoon asks basically the same question
Arthur C Clark wrote a scene in which Bowman entered a stargate as he shouted that it was full of stars. Star HD140283 appears to be older than the universe itself, so may hold clues.
I like being apart i hate idea of outside looking in
Lex is in the jungle right now stay safe!
Hes definitely dining with the cannibals right now
@@shamarrundhawa2467Cannibals dining on him. Fresh white meat is a delicacy.
Logically space must have an edge. Outside the lightcone is space. Simultaneity is also space. Therefore outside space...is more space, until the edge, like the event horizon/ergosphere. So either space inverts to time like in a black or white hole. But if time does not exist, I wouldn't even know what that means
Feels like our logic cannot be used to grasp these things
Outside the universe is the universe! What a question! Just because our so called objective standpoint seems to be outside of anything. Its a mere fiction, a human construct.
What happens if you are at the edge of the universe and try to go further?
You keep going, I guess. I definitely don’t have the answer, but I doubt there’s an invisible wall that we can’t go past, not that you’re saying that though. Interesting question, no one will ever know the answer unfortunately.Have a good one 👍.
Same thing as when you have that extra shot of vodka when you shouldn’t or that extra slice of pizza when your already full…your either puke or sh*t..nothing more that that
Our brain cannot conceptualize infinity and that's why we ask such questions. But we always end up with infinity because either our universe is infinite and there's nothing outside of it, or it's not infinite and there's something outside of it. But then what's outside that bigger thing? And what's outside of that? Etc and we're at infinity again.
This. We cannot grasp the "nature" of existence as a whole. I feel like there is infinite contraction and expansion and reorganisation/reshaping of a finite amount of matter and energy and we simply cannot grasp that It has no beginning and end. But then comes the question of our consciousness, what is it and can it disappear or has to emerge always again and again?
The 1998 movie Event Horizon did a great job of exploring what lies outside our universe. Bwahaha
There's a movie on this subject wowow I need to watch it now. Thanks buddy for this info
Wait a minute - that was a movie? Now that I think about it the crew's faces looked very familiar. Bwahaha
The answer is MULTIVERSE. Just like bubbles in sea foam, on a giant scale we are separated by membranes and what is observed microscopic is also constructed on a macro or giant scale.
I can't close my eyes and fathom what's outside the universe. I can however close my eyes and imagine Lex is conversing with Alan Alda.
If spacetime is emergent, which is the thesis of Carroll et al, something outside of the universe is a requirement.
Not unless it really emerged from nothing. ;)
@@procerusgigasCarroll would say that it's emerging from Hilbert space which requires mathematical platonism. Note if you model relativistic measurement as causal patches which most quantum cosmologists do, we don't get back a contiguous "Universe" anyway. We get a discontiguous quilt of event spaces. We can't point out "there" and think of this thing as one big consistent objective reality.
To say that spacetime is emergent is more accurately described as emergent lightcones. Applying reciprocity (as well as AdS/CFT modeling) we don't get back from these systems the notion which necessitates a "world out there" beyond our experience. It's likely we are all in a mathematical void and there is no universe to speak of beyond observing it.
It is either infinite, or there is an outside to somewhere else... but then that something else is either infinite or has an outside to something else,.... ♾️♾️♾️
Hit me wit the Eminem crypto commercial 😂😂 Downloading now! 😂
What a way to avoid the question. Mainstream science simply doesn't stray from mainstream thought.
There are multiple thought exercises and also simple questions that many ask and ponder on.
If the universe had a beginning (yes, if. Because it's not a completely accepted theory) then what was there before?
Another/the same universe which contracted in itself?
Nothing at all until the big bang?
If nothing at all, then how can that be. What science is there to explain that. If none or very little, then it's fair to come up with new suppositions but it all needs further evidence and no one theory is completely true, it's just waiting for further evidence to back it up.
If it's an infinite contracting and expanding universe, how did it begin? It can't not have a beginning.
To me, all these questions pose a more profound and even somewhat, spiritual but still logical, debate.
The truth of the universe may very well be very confusing and even unfathomable for us.
Or it could be a relatively simple concept, containing some clear rules and boundaries.
The universe by definition is everything that exists...that means there is no outside of the universe.
A materialist would naturally have a hard time imagining the immaterial. I wouldn't like to think of myself as a materialist but I have the same problem.
Space was not created along with matter in the Big bang. Space appears to be infinitely expanding and eternal. Therefore there would be an infinite number of other locations within the vastness of space, where events similar to The Big bang have occurred. Essentially other universes that we can never interact with due to the expansion of space. At least that's my understanding.
A much better explanation than the very limited and very erroneous hypothesis called the Big Bang.
The Big Bang 😂 All science asks for is one miracle.
Pothead questions are the best when you’re not a pothead
According to mystics like Simone Weil the universe is a dream in the mind of God who also infinitely transcends his creation. What’s outside the universe? Here’s what she said about that: “When a soul has attained a love filling the whole universe indiscriminately, this love becomes the bird with golden wings that pierces an opening in the egg of the world. After that, such a soul loves the universe, not from within but from without; from the dwelling place of the Wisdom of God, our first-born brother. Such a love does not love beings and things in God, but from the abode of God. Being close to God it views all beings and things from there, and its gaze is merged in the gaze of God.” Simone Weil. French mystic. 1909-1943
The universe is very zen.
If…there’s no an "outside of universe…" then, what is the universe growing rapidly into?
And experimental verification has to be converted in an understandable rational description or it can not be considered to be true.
This means we determine truth to our 5 senses and our capacity to describe it because there exists nothing beyond our 5 senses. As if the universe would have been created based on us. What humility are they talking about?
We live in a "simulation", one made of time and matter.
Who runs the simulation? Who created him? Does he have a beginning and an end?
Again the question "what is outside of universe"
If there is nothing outside of the universe, then what is the universe expanding into?
The universe is expanding into nothing.
Clearly the universe is expanding into hummus.
It’s no weirder than there is no before the Big Bang.
I thought there were many bubble universes like ours outside the 93 billion light year horizon
The question is, is there some things (whether abstract or concrete things) that can exist without space and time? or
(1). If space and time don't exist then nothing exists.
Is (1) true or false. Avoids the "outside universe" talk.
I subscribe to the belief that there is an infinite number of opposites. But as such, taken together they all cancel each other out. So, in reality, there is nothing. We are an expression of nothing. A part of nothing.
Well hawking says other universes
Probably the way of thinking inside and outside is not a proper method to get an imagination of how it could be in eternity.
whether it's all inside or there is an outside, one thing is undeniably true: infinity exists
I agree, but many don't.
If you have to imagine it, imagine whatever you want.
How can there be no outside if the universe is expanding? Doesn’t this simple fact mean there’s an outside?
If space and time came into existence after the Big Bang from the tiny superhot singularity, in what did that singularity reside?
Eric Weinstein should have a debate or conversation with Sean Carroll. People that want simple information would dislike Eric, like it already happens.
I’m curious to why we don’t see alien life on planets maybe that’s because we only see the past
If the Big Bang theory is correct and the universe is continually expanding then by definition there is an outer edge that continues to fill space of some kind and expand into that space. Without space to expand into, all of the energy and mass would eventually collide with whatever the barrier is. Saying there is “no outside the universe” seems to disprove many long held physics theories.
Humans cannot fathom infinity
Sean Carrol: Be skeptical of theories without experimental falsification.
Also, Sean Carrol: Many worlds is the most plausible theory of the everything.
I don't think the origin of the universe can be answered by human intelligence alone. This is where Ai can help us over the cliff. Ai can observe and extrapolate ideas and theories about the universe we can't even conceive of. Observing how Ai can seem to find exploits in any gaming system it is taught to play, this strength I would imagine could be used to exploit and understand any system. So long as the data is true.
Why can’t we just say we don’t know. Yes our current notion of relative ticking time is linked to the timespace in the present universe but how do you even prove there’s nothing beyond our universe. We have no measurement or experimental strategies to prove this afaik but I’m happy to be corrected.
If the universe is the totality of everything, what exactly is it expanding into?? That expansion has already been verified by Hubble.
It cant be everything because it is composed of dependent contingent beings. There must be an necessary independent being outside of the universe/contingent beings.
The universe is expanding into nothing.
@@Trev0r98 nothing doesnt exist
@@DestroyNeoCommunism That's why the universe expands into it.
I suggest that the part that we see expanding is just a small portion of the universe so that expansion is expanding into the universe. If we don’t agree that the universe is everything then we should change its name.
The universe is a of God to people like Sean Carroll. They accept it as a miracle of sorts that requires no explanation and they accept it as eternal.
That which simply 'is'.
Something inside nothing. Makes total sense...
To have an inside it has to have outside. It's common sense. Beliefs are not truth because you want it to be. That is not how truth works !
Carroll will not go down the rabbit hole that LexF wants to. Have seen this played out with other guests that are strictly rational and won't engage. Lex's issue is that he want to go to the metaphysical, hoping for some 'other' whether that be ET's, something better/bigger than the Big Band, Sentient AI -- the strictly rational find nothing to discuss.
Definition of metaphysical:
In modern philosophical terminology, metaphysics refers to the studies of what cannot be reached through objective studies of material reality.
Before I even watch the video I have to answer the question... And it is speculation period paragraph
When I was younger I felt like I was a man trapped in a woman's body, but that all changed the day I was born.
Absolutely in agreement here. The universe provides all the answers, has nothing to hide if we look properly. It is self created and is infinite. There cannot be nothing. The universe and the laws of nature are the only creator. This was demonstrated by Spinoza 400 years ago.
Self-created from what?
@@Billy-bc8pk From the Big Bang.
@@Jsurf66 The first rule of thermodynamics is that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so how did the Big Bang create energy from nothing?
@@Billy-bc8pk There are several scientific theories adressing this fondamental question, just do some research...
@@Jsurf66 No, they actually do not address it. They defer to the energy being materialised from another dimension or that the Big Bang is the other side of a black hole, which is begging the question. It's circular and those hypotheses (not theories, since they cannot be tested) addresses nothing of the sort.
Or what if there isn't anything outside the universe because we aren't in the universe and it's a matter of perception 🤔
If there was an outside and it would have to be infinite
Can someone explain to me how space is expanding if space is nothing? Lol if it’s just light then it’s space in darkness so the universe is already infinite
Yeah, the quantum realm
Outside of the universe is God, what’s god in ?
If we found that universe was created and has a start than we should say there is a creator who created it.
This is the most comfortable and logical answer for me.
Because he is the First part in the chain he created the universe and he should not be a creation because it will be an infinite and un logical chain while all the universe is built on perfect rules.
Outside of our universe is many more universes, multiverse.
It's common sense that's why it's labeled the UNIVERSE=one verse emphasis "UNI" also the universe is calculated to be infinite/infinity 😏😉
Sean sounds like Howard Stern 😅
This is such rediculous answer to that question. The answer is, WE DONT KNOW.
Period.
If there were multiple universes, then there would need to be a field or medium that buffers them or holds them apart enough to be considered distinct. Otherwise the multiverse would eventually merge and coalesce. Maybe there were multiple in the beginning but now just one and no way to get to the field that surrounds it, and what's beyond that will remain unanswered.
I’m sorry but there is something outside of our universe. The Big Bang expanded into something that may not be space/time but if there was nothing to hold space/time…. my head hurts
we are still so primitive, i have no doubt we will get to the bottom of it all within a few thousand years, shame we wont be here for it.
Sean Carroll is a cereal box quote
A refueling station is what outside the universe
What if what we think is the universe is in fact the multiverse and that galaxies are actually other universes, and that we can see/detect/interact with them because we have similar string structures?? 👀👀
We can measure that the universe is not only expanding, but the expansion is also accelerating. The universe has to be expanding into something...
That’s not quite right. If the universe is all of space time, then there is nothing for the universe to expand into.
If you think of space time as the canvas on which the universe is painted, the canvas itself is growing in size at an accelerating rate but the picture itself doesn’t change and there is no concept of “outside the canvas”.
Does this mean that this guy doesn't know anything about his job, if nobody has discovered the answers for him job?
7 next universe belive me
Elder scrolls 6 is outside the universe
The guy who believes in multiverses/many worlds interpretation says there’s no such thing as “outside our universe”.
Man can ever know. God is everything.
DMT ❤
I'll save you 4:24 seconds of your life: we don't know
I find it most pretentious from the the supposed "learned" folk that the best answer they can give -- and one they seemingly refuse to address upfront in fear of seeming as if all the years they expended becoming learned -- is to simply say, "We don't know". Because you're correct, until we can journey to the edge of the universe, we simply do not know and we will never know until the day comes where light-speed travel (or space-bending tunnels) become(s) the norm.
Breath of fresh air listening to this podcast with a real physicist instead of the hype Terrance Howard JRE. Terrence is cool, but it takes years of vector calculus, theoretical physics, and rigorous math proofs. As a mechanical engineer, Terrence is kind of disrespectful to people who devote their lives to the field. Smh he’s cool tho he means well.