I've been keeping up with this area of human discovery for over 20 years. This documentary brilliantly summarizes most of the concepts I've learned in a beautiful way, thank you.
Thank you for making this understandable, im not a math guy at all, but i did understand and could comprehend all of this at a bare bones street level, thank you !!!
I agree the quantum biology one is really good as well. As all good documentary’s should you feel much brainier at the end of the program that you did at the start lol!
Jim's presentations are always top level stuff. The subject matter is difficult, but he always makes it interesting and easier to understand for us mere mortals who aren't so great at math and physics. Good production values also help a lot.
@@tricotdiko1435 "Five Quantum Phenomena Supporting God's Existence" ua-cam.com/video/xyQW6Jg_6z0/v-deo.html "More Quantum Evidence" ua-cam.com/video/W6WV9JXHWrA/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/D0JMcdD-0RE/v-deo.html "An Investigation into Alleged Scientific Evidence for Design" ua-cam.com/video/C5Z6h_RVhIw/v-deo.html "Cancelled Science: Some Evidence Atheists Don't Want You To See": ua-cam.com/video/TA4QutvxX88/v-deo.html "Return of the God Hypothesis ua-cam.com/video/z_8PPO-cAlA/v-deo.html "By Design" ua-cam.com/video/rXexaVsvhCM/v-deo.html "Choosing between Science and God is Advocacy for a False Dichotomy" ua-cam.com/video/Lyt9ECm8V9g/v-deo.html What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? Modern scientific insight has revealed startling evidence for intelligent design from various disciplines, from biology to astronomy, from physics to cosmology. The purpose of this article is to summarize some of the major arguments. What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - From Biology In recent years, William Dembski has pioneered a methodology which has become known as the “explanatory filter,” a means by which design can be inferred from the phenomena of nature in particular living organisms. The filter consists of a sequence of three yes/no questions that guide the decision process of determining whether a given phenomenon can be attributed to an intelligent causal agency. Based upon this filter, if an event, system or object is the product of intelligence, then it will: 1. Be contingent 2. Be complex 3. Display an independently specified pattern Thus, in order to be confident that a given phenomenon is the product of intelligent design, it cannot be a regularity that necessarily stems from the laws of nature, nor can it be the result of chance. According to Dembski, the explanatory filter highlights the most important quality of intelligently designed systems, namely, specified complexity. In other words, complexity alone is not enough to indicate the work of an intelligent agent; it must also conform to an independently specified pattern. Among the most compelling evidence for design in the realm of biology is the discovery of the digital information inherent in living cells. As it turns out, biological information comprises a complex, non-repeating sequence which is highly specified relative to the functional or communication requirements that they perform. Such similarity explains, in part, Dawkins’ observation that, “The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like.” What are we to make of this similarity between informational software-the undisputed product of conscious intelligence-and the informational sequences found in DNA and other important biomolecules? What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - From Physics In physics, the concept of cosmic fine tuning gives further support to the design inference. The concept of cosmic fine tuning relates to a unique property of our universe whereby the physical constants and laws are observed to be balanced on a “razor’s edge” for permitting the emergence of complex life. The degree to which the constants of physics must match precise criteria is such that a number of agnostic scientists have concluded that, indeed, there is some sort of transcendent purpose behind the cosmic arena. British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle wrote, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.” One example of fine tuning is the rate at which the universe expands. This value must be delicately balanced to a precision of one part in 1055. If the universe expanded too quickly, matter would expand too quickly for the formation of stars, planets, and galaxies. If the universe expanded too slowly, the universe would quickly collapse before the formation of stars. Besides that, the ratio of the electromagnetic force to gravity must be finely balanced to a degree of one part in 1040. If this value were to be increased slightly, all stars would be at least 40% more massive than our sun. This would mean that stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven to support complex life. If this value were to be decreased slightly, all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun. This would render them incapable of producing heavy elements necessary to sustain life. What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - From Cosmology With modern discoveries in the field of cosmology, the concept of a definitive beginning of the cosmos has been demonstrated almost beyond question. The Kalam argument states that: 1. Everything which begins to exist has a cause apart from itself 2. The universe began to exist 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause apart from itself Today we have abundant data that the universe had a beginning. Given the Law of Causality, there must be an uncaused first cause existing outside of space and time. This first cause, being uncaused, must be eternal. Observations of the nature of the effect lead to the conclusion that the first cause must be intelligent and powerful enough to bring space, matter and even time itself into being. What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - Conclusion This article is but a brief overview of some of the key elements involved in the design inference. The purpose is to demonstrate the wide body of support for intelligent design from a large range of disciplines, including biology, physics and cosmology. FOR FURTHER STUDY Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design by Stephen Meyer.
Isn't that just a better of projection and mistaken interpretation related to scale jumping ? People relying on their perceptions of their 5 primary senses resulted in stuff like The Bible and FlatEarthers. Unable to accept the limitations of their observations and the apparent surprises and contradictions, elaborate mythological storylines were created. Eventually, bit by bit, clever people made observations and derived interpretations therefrom which varied from the conventional habituated storylines. The *surprise and shock" of each new and increasingly subtle and precise observation was tightly linked to the clinging to the old.
Sir... I have to stand up and effusively applaud your analogy used to explain Heisenberg's uncertainty principle... The way you used total file size to explain quantization impact on acuity is simply smart. Kudos!
As Nikola Tesla said: 'ether exists!'. It is in fact the so-called 'vacuum'. From there matter is created. Compare ether with 'water' and matter with 'ice', and you get the idea.
This 2 part series is way more entertaining and we'll explained than any science movies out there..kudos to the creators, I was blown away by the connection of "TV screen and microwave light"
i've thought this as well. i'm sure it's not completely impossible that the universe could spontaneously implode on itself any moment. like there's gotta be a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance or something
watching part three tonight ..hopefully wont fall asleep.. still not sure if I missed everything on part two but one was awesome..actually all are very interesting and enjoyed ty Jim
❤ Love the way you explain and demonstrate the how and why, so that even I can understand the two. You open my eyes and knock off the dust of my brain I haven't used in a while. Thanks 👍
Fascinathing documentary. It is now 13 years old. And like a once super modern computer, in this world it is already a bit obsolete. I am not a scientist in any way but it seems to me that every generation thinks it as arrived at the thruth, that it as all the answers. One of his last sentences, « a world created out of nothing » like a certainty is largely disputed today. Today the question is: « what was there before the big bang? » We cannot imagine an eternal universe because we are temporary beings.
So Michaelson demonstrated that there was no aether, and yet we proved through the existence of the Casimir Effect the existence of the quantum foam, which takes up every last cubic inch of space in the entire universe. It sounds like we simply replaced the notion of the aether with the "quantum foam."
Finally a common sense reply. Thank you sir for confirming my own understanding and restoring my faith in humanity that not everyone swallows blithering nonsense. Michelson in his own words said that he only proved that there is no wind or drag to slow down light's perturbation speed C through the aether. Mental giants like Faraday and Maxwell built modern day technology based on "Electromagnetic spectrum" of the aether. Tesla said light is nothing but a radio wave through the aether. Einstein gave the aether "qualities" of time and objects composed of the aether location relative to an observer or sensor. These objects are a higher stable energy manifestation of the aether e=mc2 or matter. (Created by wave reinforcement [rogue waves on tsunamis].) Like ice and steam are different stable levels of energy in water. Needing a value for Albert's math to math, a background energy level at rest he called the cosmological constant, is a value of the aether, but he changed the notion of aether with "fabric of space time". Aether became "quantum foam" after Plank measured the energy level (in stable energy level "measurements" [not particles] called electrons ) around a proton of a hydrogen atom. (A dynamo with gravity and energy fields like planets stars and galaxies.) Hydrogen is the building block of the periodic table of elements with increasing levels of aether energy. Radio astronomy calls the aether "cosmic background radiation". Cern call it the "Higgs field". To deny the existence of aether is like Galileo's inquisitors insisting that the earth is the center of the universe.
I want to remember i heard this documentary when i reappeared in another time and another place... I loved from the moment it started to the moment it ends. And i want you to write me a love letter for my crush because she has been quantum physics until this day and you would have explained it how much i loved her and run in to me...
nothing is one of our many concepts about everything. its either there is something or there is nothing. and that nothing only refers to what our minds can gauge, no more no less
We and everything around us are popping in and out of existence all the time. The average between something and nothing goes in favor of something, by a minimal fraction.
Thank you for this insightful look into reality. It seems the more I try to understand the less I actally know. At the same time, the more I try to know the less I understand. It's all very confusing yet utterly facinating. 😮😂
Having watched both parts of this documentary in immediate succession, I can confidently confirm both of these statements. I'm doing so, I, too, know EVERYTHING and NOTHING.
Artifacts of scale- and perception-jumping... Take the cat out of the box - now it's empty. Look more carefully - cat hair and dander... Remove those Now it's empty. Look more carefully and use sensitive instruments - there are gases... Evacuate them NOW there is nothing. and on it goes .. Are EM fields, cosmic rays, quantum fluctuations non-nothing ? Depends purely on the scale of sensitivity / perfection / esoterica one chooses to fetishize
Visualizing an infinity- if I travelled at light speed towards any galaxy 10 billion light years away, it will still eventually fall out of my visual horizon and if I lived forever, I'll be further away from it then, than I'm right now due to expansion. Visualizing Singularity, nothing is Forever in time dilation
If you traveled at light speed, time stops for you, so you would effectively live forever. It takes light time to travel, but for the photon, the travel time was instantaneous
@@_quandary_ correct. Photons don't experience time so photon is never aware of its location or existence. Time doesn't stop and traveler gets to go everywhere and do everything. Time traveler will be near frozen in spacetime and trillions of billions of years will pass in mare seconds for the traveler and universe ends in a whimper from time travelers point of view.
Good analogy on infinity, but I think it still draws out, and leaves unanswered, the actual conundrum. In your analogy, the universe could still have an edge but be functionally infinite because the rate of expansion vs. c at any given distant points. But if we could pause expansion (not that we could, but since it seems the rate has fluctuated over time, and it seems to have a starting point, I think it’s “okay” to manipulate this variable and what’s left over would still represent reality. Because again, it seems it’s changed within that reality before), would the universe be actually spatially infinite? I feel like where on the surface of a sphere, something akin to that, so functionally infinite to us, but not actually infinite. But that’s just my coin flip; I don’t think we’ll ever know. Interesting example.
Great Dokumentation! But, to explain it more detailed, cosmic Inflation should be mentioned, not easy to explain, but overwhelming, it explains how it came to the big bang!
I haven't watched this yet but yes. My things is: Black screen/White screen. Nothing/Everything. It's the same thing, functionally. There is no meaning there. You need the tension between the two to give you something. To show you a picture on the screen. A dance. A mingling. Forever.
Science simply just want to avoid stepping into the realm of metaphysics.. This "apparent emptiness" just conclusively points to a Divine Force holding the whole "invisible potencies".🤩
I need the connection between Dirac and the "2001 A Space Odyssey" movie explained! His overall theories & works were in the 1920's & 30's, while the movie wasn't until 1968🤔
What a coincidence @39:19 Diracs equation has the symbol of Shiva's Trident. Hi, im from India, we instantly connect with The Shiva Tatva (element), when we talk about nothingness. Everything that exists in the universe, is manifested from that nothingness, and everything will go back into that nothingness. And it's a cycle that never ends. Om Namah Shivaya 🙏🔱
Its a shame the overwhelming number of people who think love island and x factor and strictly are the epitome of entertainment . Humans tend to choose the lowest common denominator. So lucky are we to have this explained to us
I had to do a speech to pass my school certificate, and when I was asked what I was going to do it about I chose to do it on nothing. It took a while for my teacher to realize that I meant I was doing it about nothing and not just doing nothing, she was like 😮. But yeah I concluded that nothing is a real paradox. In being nothing it becomes something, that is it becomes the thing that doesn't exist -nothing. The only place nothing could exist is nowhere, because if you for example removed everything from within a jar you would have a vacuum and not nothing. So yeah I agree, it's really hard to define and it's a real paradox.
We live in a reality of opposites. For every concept their is an opposing concept. A concept and it’s opposite exist simultaneously on a shared plane. For example the concept of up exists simultaneously with the concept of down on the plane of direction. Therefore, the state of “something” cannot exist without its opposite state of “nothing”. The problem with “nothing” is how to measure it with tools made of “something”.
When antimatter and matter annihilated each other in the early universe, maybe some antimatter could have been displaced in multi-dimensional space so that it only interacts gravitationally with ordinary matter. If so, it would have the characteristics of dark matter.
maybe it's not space that is expanding, but that the 'outside' of our space is shrinking. That would exolain the acceration, as the more it shrinks the less it is and the more our 'space' is needed tp replace it. take a sphere of 1 cm radius and then 1 of an exponetially growing radius, the circumfernce starts to streatch at an ever incraeasing speed just to stand still
The way oversimplified verson: Vacuum sucked so hard that matter got pulled into existing from nothing, but the matter was like 'there's nothing here, I'm going back. Peace.' Some stayed though.
An artifact of perception and scale. There exists a strong thread of insistence that everything exists and occurs at all scales... Which simply us not true. Consider the two-slit experiment ... Has it ever been successfully conducted at large scales? i.e. a human running toward two human-scale slits (or the American version - a car driving at two car- scale slits. Consider quantum effects ... To build quantum computers , the extremely rarefied exotic esoteric conditions for quantum states to occur must be carefully created and suitable interfaces provided to achieve the programming and data exchange. The. Presumption that "quantum is everywhere always" by the meatsuits is just silly. Meanwhile the existential predicaments and MetaCrisis perpetrated by centuries of colonialism and willful deliberate hyper-consumptive hyper-emissive eco-cidal psychosociopathic dominator cult-ure gets actively ignored and denied - often with fraudulent esoteric rationalizations
*Correction: actually, the uncertainty principle may only be epistemic, not ontologic. There are various many, equally valid, interpretations of QM, some of which state that it is fully deterministic and that particles have defined positions and momenta at all times, just that we're unable to measure both such values with equal precision at any one time--note that such locally real interpretations require either multiple universes, non-local FTL causality, or Superdeterminism.
I've been keeping up with this area of human discovery for over 20 years. This documentary brilliantly summarizes most of the concepts I've learned in a beautiful way, thank you.
Incredibly well made, what a journey! The narrative is so clear, so beautiful.
The kind of dedication and patience required to put this together is truly amazing.
For real. Had to wait like 14 billion years.
@@Rabbinicphilosophyforthewin🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I find remarkable how high the percentage of comments having nothing to say about the topic and everything to say about its presentation.
Love the analogy of Dirac's equation being likened to the "compressed meaning" found in a poem.
So good to see the professor again! Even if it is over nothing.
Very good!
Good laugh
😂 Love it
Thank you for making this understandable, im not a math guy at all, but i did understand and could comprehend all of this at a bare bones street level, thank you !!!
As a layman with an interest in the universe this is probably the two best videos i have seen to aid my understanding
Neither of these videos is a layman.
Same here brotha....
I agree the quantum biology one is really good as well. As all good documentary’s should you feel much brainier at the end of the program that you did at the start lol!
Add one more same here
@@TheDavidlloydjones he didnt say the video was layman...he said he himself as the viewer was a layman
Jims narration is beautiful and captivating, almost like my hero ' Carl Sagan '.
Jim's presentations are always top level stuff. The subject matter is difficult, but he always makes it interesting and easier to understand for us mere mortals who aren't so great at math and physics. Good production values also help a lot.
Everything said about Dirac's personality points towards a good dash of Autism.
This takes the 'I'm not a mistake" phrase to a whole new level
❤Another excellent programme. Thank you very much publisher. Thank you very much Jim .
another excellent description of the universe around us! Thank you Jim!
get a room
I've never seen a documentary about nothing as long as this one.
Very profound, incredibly overwhelming, great stuff
Hush little muppet
"Emptiness is what makes up almost the entire Universe." One of the most profound and unsettling facts in science.
But it's this emptiness that allows balance. One going around one !
Why? God needs alot of elbow room.
@@James-ll3jbRight? They don’t call him the “god of the gaps”for nothing!😅
@@tricotdiko1435 "Five Quantum Phenomena Supporting God's Existence"
ua-cam.com/video/xyQW6Jg_6z0/v-deo.html
"More Quantum Evidence"
ua-cam.com/video/W6WV9JXHWrA/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/D0JMcdD-0RE/v-deo.html
"An Investigation into Alleged Scientific Evidence for Design"
ua-cam.com/video/C5Z6h_RVhIw/v-deo.html
"Cancelled Science: Some Evidence Atheists Don't Want You To See":
ua-cam.com/video/TA4QutvxX88/v-deo.html
"Return of the God Hypothesis
ua-cam.com/video/z_8PPO-cAlA/v-deo.html
"By Design"
ua-cam.com/video/rXexaVsvhCM/v-deo.html
"Choosing between Science and God is Advocacy for a False Dichotomy"
ua-cam.com/video/Lyt9ECm8V9g/v-deo.html
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design?
Modern scientific insight has revealed startling evidence for intelligent design from various disciplines, from biology to astronomy, from physics to cosmology. The purpose of this article is to summarize some of the major arguments.
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - From Biology
In recent years, William Dembski has pioneered a methodology which has become known as the “explanatory filter,” a means by which design can be inferred from the phenomena of nature in particular living organisms. The filter consists of a sequence of three yes/no questions that guide the decision process of determining whether a given phenomenon can be attributed to an intelligent causal agency. Based upon this filter, if an event, system or object is the product of intelligence, then it will:
1. Be contingent
2. Be complex
3. Display an independently specified pattern
Thus, in order to be confident that a given phenomenon is the product of intelligent design, it cannot be a regularity that necessarily stems from the laws of nature, nor can it be the result of chance. According to Dembski, the explanatory filter highlights the most important quality of intelligently designed systems, namely, specified complexity. In other words, complexity alone is not enough to indicate the work of an intelligent agent; it must also conform to an independently specified pattern.
Among the most compelling evidence for design in the realm of biology is the discovery of the digital information inherent in living cells. As it turns out, biological information comprises a complex, non-repeating sequence which is highly specified relative to the functional or communication requirements that they perform. Such similarity explains, in part, Dawkins’ observation that, “The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like.” What are we to make of this similarity between informational software-the undisputed product of conscious intelligence-and the informational sequences found in DNA and other important biomolecules?
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - From Physics
In physics, the concept of cosmic fine tuning gives further support to the design inference. The concept of cosmic fine tuning relates to a unique property of our universe whereby the physical constants and laws are observed to be balanced on a “razor’s edge” for permitting the emergence of complex life. The degree to which the constants of physics must match precise criteria is such that a number of agnostic scientists have concluded that, indeed, there is some sort of transcendent purpose behind the cosmic arena. British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle wrote, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”
One example of fine tuning is the rate at which the universe expands. This value must be delicately balanced to a precision of one part in 1055. If the universe expanded too quickly, matter would expand too quickly for the formation of stars, planets, and galaxies. If the universe expanded too slowly, the universe would quickly collapse before the formation of stars.
Besides that, the ratio of the electromagnetic force to gravity must be finely balanced to a degree of one part in 1040. If this value were to be increased slightly, all stars would be at least 40% more massive than our sun. This would mean that stellar burning would be too brief and too uneven to support complex life. If this value were to be decreased slightly, all stars would be at least 20% less massive than the sun. This would render them incapable of producing heavy elements necessary to sustain life.
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? - From Cosmology
With modern discoveries in the field of cosmology, the concept of a definitive beginning of the cosmos has been demonstrated almost beyond question. The Kalam argument states that:
1. Everything which begins to exist has a cause apart from itself
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause apart from itself
Today we have abundant data that the universe had a beginning. Given the Law of Causality, there must be an uncaused first cause existing outside of space and time. This first cause, being uncaused, must be eternal. Observations of the nature of the effect lead to the conclusion that the first cause must be intelligent and powerful enough to bring space, matter and even time itself into being.
What is the best evidence/argument for intelligent design? -
Conclusion
This article is but a brief overview of some of the key elements involved in the design inference. The purpose is to demonstrate the wide body of support for intelligent design from a large range of disciplines, including biology, physics and cosmology.
FOR FURTHER STUDY
Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design by Stephen Meyer.
Isn't that just a better of projection and mistaken interpretation related to scale jumping ?
People relying on their perceptions of their 5 primary senses resulted in stuff like The Bible and FlatEarthers.
Unable to accept the limitations of their observations and the apparent surprises and contradictions, elaborate mythological storylines were created.
Eventually, bit by bit, clever people made observations and derived interpretations therefrom which varied from the conventional habituated storylines.
The *surprise and shock" of each new and increasingly subtle and precise observation was tightly linked to the clinging to the old.
What a production! A masterwork from Nic Stacey.
Always mesmerised by prof Al khalili ' s documentaries
Mind boggling truth unearthed by this documentary. Absolutely loved it, was so captivating.
Excellent presentation and beautiful graphics. This video is strangely comforting. Thank you!
Sir... I have to stand up and effusively applaud your analogy used to explain Heisenberg's uncertainty principle... The way you used total file size to explain quantization impact on acuity is simply smart. Kudos!
I love this so much it almost answers all the questions I always had.
Thank you so much
As Nikola Tesla said: 'ether exists!'. It is in fact the so-called 'vacuum'. From there matter is created. Compare ether with 'water' and matter with 'ice', and you get the idea.
Tesla was mistaken, as the Michelson-Morley experiment confirmed.
truly love it! At same point I have to pause to rethink and under the complex part of the video. Thank to SpaceRip, all the professors.
1:18- That is what makes me wonder how red shift is possible in a vacuum where no force, no grab, no nothing to act on the lights to stretch it 😇😱
Nothing is impossible the optimist said. He was right. Once you point at nothing. It becomes something to see.
INCREDIBLE - I'm recommending both videos to everyone I know!!!
Part 1 & Part 2 were such great videos! Thank you for sharing this knowledge 😊
This is the best explanation I have ever found on the quantum world. Amazing documentary!
This 2 part series is way more entertaining and we'll explained than any science movies out there..kudos to the creators, I was blown away by the connection of "TV screen and microwave light"
I wonder if it could all go away as instantaneously as it started. A terrifying thought but also very beautiful.
i've thought this as well. i'm sure it's not completely impossible that the universe could spontaneously implode on itself any moment. like there's gotta be a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance or something
This series was amazing! It cleared up some things for me on matter/antimatter and dark energy.
“Nothing” would mean no dimensions, no quarks, no time, no space. “Nothing” cannot be visually or physically perceived by our brains.
i love how there's like 100 people with different definitions of nothing thinking they're smarter than youtube science communicator man
It can't be perceived because it's nothing. It's not limitation of our brains. It's the inherent nature of nothingness itself.
Both parts, 1 and 2, are equally great. 👍🏼👍🏼💪🏼💪🏼
watching part three tonight ..hopefully wont fall asleep.. still not sure if I missed everything on part two but one was awesome..actually all are very interesting and enjoyed ty Jim
❤ Love the way you explain and demonstrate the how and why, so that even I can understand the two. You open my eyes and knock off the dust of my brain I haven't used in a while. Thanks 👍
Fascinathing documentary. It is now 13 years old. And like a once super modern computer, in this world it is already a bit obsolete. I am not a scientist in any way but it seems to me that every generation thinks it as arrived at the thruth, that it as all the answers. One of his last sentences, « a world created out of nothing » like a certainty is largely disputed today. Today the question is: « what was there before the big bang? » We cannot imagine an eternal universe because we are temporary beings.
Profoundly beautifully explained! Thank you all for this amazing documentary! May the force be with you 🙏
It seems that what we term 'emptiness' is just what nature terms potential .
Excellent video . Fascinating , Thank you .
Love your programs and Brian Cox to you are both very clever keep these programs going love all of them
Excellent.... thanks 🙏.
I do love these videos. Can't imagine how it could be more on point and digestible. 😮👌🏾
Another Jim Al-Khalili interesting video
Nice presentation... still no answer by Science to knowledge about life.
Thanks to nothing we are able to witness these 2 exceptional episodes!
I'm so glad I found this video again. Truly fascinating! I'm no mathematical genius, but I do understand its significance.
What a teacher, narrator and production! Huge stuff to understand the universe! Thank you!
So Michaelson demonstrated that there was no aether, and yet we proved through the existence of the Casimir Effect the existence of the quantum foam, which takes up every last cubic inch of space in the entire universe. It sounds like we simply replaced the notion of the aether with the "quantum foam."
Finally a common sense reply. Thank you sir for confirming my own understanding and restoring my faith in humanity that not everyone swallows blithering nonsense.
Michelson in his own words said that he only proved that there is no wind or drag to slow down light's perturbation speed C through the aether.
Mental giants like Faraday and Maxwell built modern day technology based on "Electromagnetic spectrum" of the aether. Tesla said light is nothing but a radio wave through the aether. Einstein gave the aether "qualities" of time and objects composed of the aether location relative to an observer or sensor. These objects are a higher stable energy manifestation of the aether e=mc2 or matter. (Created by wave reinforcement [rogue waves on tsunamis].) Like ice and steam are different stable levels of energy in water. Needing a value for Albert's math to math, a background energy level at rest he called the cosmological constant, is a value of the aether, but he changed the notion of aether with "fabric of space time".
Aether became "quantum foam" after Plank measured the energy level (in stable energy level "measurements" [not particles] called electrons ) around a proton of a hydrogen atom. (A dynamo with gravity and energy fields like planets stars and galaxies.) Hydrogen is the building block of the periodic table of elements with increasing levels of aether energy.
Radio astronomy calls the aether "cosmic background radiation".
Cern call it the "Higgs field".
To deny the existence of aether is like Galileo's inquisitors insisting that the earth is the center of the universe.
I want to remember i heard this documentary when i reappeared in another time and another place...
I loved from the moment it started to the moment it ends. And i want you to write me a love letter for my crush because she has been quantum physics until this day and you would have explained it how much i loved her and run in to me...
So good it goes beyond words. (Paul Dirac would understand that!)
nothing is one of our many concepts about everything. its either there is something or there is nothing. and that nothing only refers to what our minds can gauge, no more no less
We and everything around us are popping in and out of existence all the time. The average between something and nothing goes in favor of something, by a minimal fraction.
He has an excellent voice for presentation. : ) He's engrossing.
Thank you Jim
All this time I thought that Dirac was a theoretical scientist but I've just now discovered he was a real live person after all.
That's cool. I listened to I guess part one
Now I get to listen too part too.
That earns a sub.
Thanks spacerip.❤
Very well made docs.pt1 and pt2. Congrats.
Just amazing, thank you ❤
What a beautiful series
Again Awesome job folks,, thank you.
Thank you for this insightful look into reality. It seems the more I try to understand the less I actally know. At the same time, the more I try to know the less I understand. It's all very confusing yet utterly facinating. 😮😂
If you only knew how much the universe needs you to brighten up the sky you would be surprised
Now I know everything about nothing.
I know nothing about everything
Having watched both parts of this documentary in immediate succession, I can confidently confirm both of these statements. I'm doing so, I, too, know EVERYTHING and NOTHING.
You know nothing if you claim you know everything 😂
There is nothing to know about nothing because it doesn't exist , only the word ! . .
And the fact you are something
In other words nothing is something, because nothing has a name...
gives a whole new spin on the phrase "nothing is impossible"
"NOTHING" is not a difficult concept. It does not exist. Space is not NOTHING. Neither is EMPTINESS.
indeed; space is sth that gravity disform that and when gravity pay too much with space create BLACK HOLES
Shouldn’t it take 0 seconds to travel through nothing? Surely space is something. I just don’t understand lol
Artifacts of scale- and perception-jumping...
Take the cat out of the box - now it's empty.
Look more carefully - cat hair and dander... Remove those
Now it's empty.
Look more carefully and use sensitive instruments - there are gases... Evacuate them
NOW there is nothing.
and on it goes ..
Are EM fields, cosmic rays, quantum fluctuations non-nothing ?
Depends purely on the scale of sensitivity / perfection / esoterica one chooses to fetishize
Human brain can't conceive Nothing, as as soon as you think of nothing it still becomes something.......st*ner view
@@Dsamf2You are correct, but you have to travel at the speed of light. A photon does not experience time or distance.
Visualizing an infinity- if I travelled at light speed towards any galaxy 10 billion light years away, it will still eventually fall out of my visual horizon and if I lived forever, I'll be further away from it then, than I'm right now due to expansion.
Visualizing Singularity, nothing is Forever in time dilation
If you traveled at light speed, time stops for you, so you would effectively live forever. It takes light time to travel, but for the photon, the travel time was instantaneous
@@_quandary_ correct. Photons don't experience time so photon is never aware of its location or existence. Time doesn't stop and traveler gets to go everywhere and do everything. Time traveler will be near frozen in spacetime and trillions of billions of years will pass in mare seconds for the traveler and universe ends in a whimper from time travelers point of view.
Good analogy on infinity, but I think it still draws out, and leaves unanswered, the actual conundrum. In your analogy, the universe could still have an edge but be functionally infinite because the rate of expansion vs. c at any given distant points. But if we could pause expansion (not that we could, but since it seems the rate has fluctuated over time, and it seems to have a starting point, I think it’s “okay” to manipulate this variable and what’s left over would still represent reality. Because again, it seems it’s changed within that reality before), would the universe be actually spatially infinite?
I feel like where on the surface of a sphere, something akin to that, so functionally infinite to us, but not actually infinite. But that’s just my coin flip; I don’t think we’ll ever know. Interesting example.
Amazing work!! I wish to get more understanding of dark matter, dark energy and overall what is this vacuum/vastness. Why it exists?
Great Dokumentation! But, to explain it more detailed, cosmic Inflation should be mentioned, not easy to explain, but overwhelming, it explains how it came to the big bang!
I haven't watched this yet but yes. My things is: Black screen/White screen. Nothing/Everything. It's the same thing, functionally. There is no meaning there. You need the tension between the two to give you something. To show you a picture on the screen. A dance. A mingling. Forever.
Science simply just want to avoid stepping into the realm of metaphysics.. This "apparent emptiness" just conclusively points to a Divine Force holding the whole "invisible potencies".🤩
Oh please...🙄
im drunk n stoned n tripping on this dudes lecture
I need the connection between Dirac and the "2001 A Space Odyssey" movie explained! His overall theories & works were in the 1920's & 30's, while the movie wasn't until 1968🤔
was wondering this as well but google says he died in 1984 so maybe he enjoyed the film later in his life when he was older?
We can't percieve and comprehend nothing because we as humans tend to give everything meaning.
What a coincidence @39:19 Diracs equation has the symbol of Shiva's Trident. Hi, im from India, we instantly connect with The Shiva Tatva (element), when we talk about nothingness. Everything that exists in the universe, is manifested from that nothingness, and everything will go back into that nothingness. And it's a cycle that never ends. Om Namah Shivaya 🙏🔱
Its a shame the overwhelming number of people who think love island and x factor and strictly are the epitome of entertainment . Humans tend to choose the lowest common denominator. So lucky are we to have this explained to us
I had to do a speech to pass my school certificate, and when I was asked what I was going to do it about I chose to do it on nothing. It took a while for my teacher to realize that I meant I was doing it about nothing and not just doing nothing, she was like 😮. But yeah I concluded that nothing is a real paradox. In being nothing it becomes something, that is it becomes the thing that doesn't exist -nothing. The only place nothing could exist is nowhere, because if you for example removed everything from within a jar you would have a vacuum and not nothing. So yeah I agree, it's really hard to define and it's a real paradox.
Fantastic content. Thank u.
I believe everything when you actually explain beyond reasonably doubt how big bang took place in the first place!
Ancient mystics were true when cried WE ARE NOTHING.😢
Progress in science is slowed by those who elevate supposed understanding to dogma.
Anybody else think it was creepy When other dude was super close,quoting the Italian dude about us living in an ocean of air?
The glory of God remains the fundamental reality. Physics and philosophy merely scratch the surface of knowledge of the eternal one's nature.
You do realise if there is a god, it's a physicist?
We live in a reality of opposites. For every concept their is an opposing concept. A concept and it’s opposite exist simultaneously on a shared plane. For example the concept of up exists simultaneously with the concept of down on the plane of direction. Therefore, the state of “something” cannot exist without its opposite state of “nothing”. The problem with “nothing” is how to measure it with tools made of “something”.
Profoundly enlightening
Why these documentaries are around several years on different channels ? It seems they keep removing and re-uploading them. 😮😮😮
When antimatter and matter annihilated each other in the early universe, maybe some antimatter could have been displaced in multi-dimensional space so that it only interacts gravitationally with ordinary matter. If so, it would have the characteristics of dark matter.
This is the best science documentary ive seen. I can easily understand it. As if im genius. Hahaha
I remembered the saying, "Silence has much to say"
Absolutely mind blowing
Brilliant, brilliant....
Nearly scrolled past this but then noticed it was Jim...
So our universe is virtual in nature. It could pop right back out of existence as easily as it began?
Thankyou for the information ❤
maybe it's not space that is expanding, but that the 'outside' of our space is shrinking. That would exolain the acceration, as the more it shrinks the less it is and the more our 'space' is needed tp replace it. take a sphere of 1 cm radius and then 1 of an exponetially growing radius, the circumfernce starts to streatch at an ever incraeasing speed just to stand still
Great content!
The way oversimplified verson:
Vacuum sucked so hard that matter got pulled into existing from nothing, but the matter was like 'there's nothing here, I'm going back. Peace.' Some stayed though.
An artifact of perception and scale.
There exists a strong thread of insistence that everything exists and occurs at all scales... Which simply us not true.
Consider the two-slit experiment ... Has it ever been successfully conducted at large scales? i.e. a human running toward two human-scale slits (or the American version - a car driving at two car- scale slits.
Consider quantum effects ...
To build quantum computers , the extremely rarefied exotic esoteric conditions for quantum states to occur must be carefully created and suitable interfaces provided to achieve the programming and data exchange.
The. Presumption that "quantum is everywhere always" by the meatsuits is just silly.
Meanwhile the existential predicaments and MetaCrisis perpetrated by centuries of colonialism and willful deliberate hyper-consumptive hyper-emissive eco-cidal psychosociopathic dominator cult-ure gets actively ignored and denied - often with fraudulent esoteric rationalizations
Great research.
*Correction: actually, the uncertainty principle may only be epistemic, not ontologic. There are various many, equally valid, interpretations of QM, some of which state that it is fully deterministic and that particles have defined positions and momenta at all times, just that we're unable to measure both such values with equal precision at any one time--note that such locally real interpretations require either multiple universes, non-local FTL causality, or Superdeterminism.
Love these