At the end of this video, the question is asked "Just what is it that could break symmetry, hence trigger creation?" [paraphrased] To my mind, the much more intriguing question would be "just what type of field, or force, or event exists, or existed, that could bring into a physical realm, or appropriate vibrational/frequency state, a perfectly symmetrical ism/ion?" To me, this is, by orders of magnitude, a fantastically more difficult realization/state of matter/reality to create. Where there are an infinite number of ways to break symmetry, how many ways are there to create perfect symmetry? Zero? (not homo sapiens to create it...just anything, anyone, whatever)
do not muck about with antimatter indoors. always experiment in the open, your garden or in the road for example. wear gloves and goggles and an outdoors coat. shout "antimatter" to give people some warning proceed with confidence.
Thanks for posting this great video. One stands in awe against such greatness in our universe. We must pity those that confuse faith with the reality of nature. Faith is just that, faith. It can be compared to an empty dinner plate.
"Inward spherical wave fronts multiplying time dilation at right+angles compressing+4-0-4+-decompressing expanding sphere's now dividing gravity at right-angles."
+Alan Jay I wonder that too. Has kind of a scam/multi-level-marketing feel to it, with all the spam. Most of the comments are definitely bots - there's almost always a second comment saying "thanks for this" or something like that.
+Alan Jay Of course a dumb-ass will buy into anything. I am pitching a game show in Hollywood right now that has people eating their own shit for cash, called "Bottoms Up"!! I dare them and then the dumb-asses risk possible death and certain illness to eat their own shit as I offer increasing amounts of money until they munch out!! Dumb-asses Unite!!!!!! All hail the Dumb-asses!!!!!!!!!!
"It starts from the point you began to draw/make it and ends when it connects back to that point" I'm not asking you about a circle "you've drawn" I'm asking you about the idea of a circle thats already drawn. Also 0 to 360 degrees denotes that something is turning on the same axis which isn't the case with a circle since you depart from the point you start and make a loop. Also by saying that something ends where it starts as you did, you're indirectly affirming
Matter occupies the 3 dimensions we see/understand and anti matter occupies the other dimensions (6?) that we cannot see - that is what I have deduced from watching these informative vids
If matter forms mass, could it go to reason that anti matter cannot form mass? Instead perpetually forcing apart? And if this be the case, and the fact that more anti matter is produced each day throughout the universe is considered, could it case the universe as we know it to expand faster and faster each day as we see?
my thought is similar to you.If matter can form mass(gravity as property) than antimatter can form antimass(antigravity as property), but due to very initial property of antigravity they cannot concentrete but tend to disperse. they should be distributed in entire space prabably 1unit/cubic meter or km or similar and it will not easy to detect.I have video regarding this on youtube
DonatoThomas you have not a clue. black hole cores are gravity made things that hold the exact potential to make space time exactly as we have it... to not go to black hole cores for the big bang is to say GOD DID IT...choose! Antimatter and matter make PURE ENERGY and the whole Universe space time you know is the LEFT OVERS not the antimatter or the matter but what was left over in matter... and things that come out of black hole cores become HYDROGEN and HYDROGEN made this Universe space time you know... no one can prove me wrong on this planet...do not try! it is ether a magical wave or 2 spheres... choose stupidity of waves or God did it or 2 black hole cores hit and one of them was made of antimatter...just happens to fit 100% correct to all events from the big bang to this day... so it has to be wrong???? grow up people!
NO you can't think anti matter is reversed in function IT IS NOT! All matter and anti matter act ALMOST exactly the same... a table in antimatter is exactly the same as one in matter but would explode in the AIR just touching atoms in the matter air...the composition of anti matter is simple positive and negative reversal of positions... on contact with the opposed on it turns each into energy instantly... they decompose to basic part of energy... then no one is really sure...since nothing is lost in Universe...what kind of energies were produced is now interesting to humans...light to heavy atoms are desired to be tested. For You to be asking me the question say you did not go look any of it up to learn it and know it for the rest of your life...why no just go learn how it works from the experts and pictures and all. Worth the effort!
NO, youir choices are God did from NOTHING or something made the things that made the big bang happen... and them things had to exist before the BIG BANG... so them things had to be spheres. Only by colliding 2 spheres can we make an event of such scale. the largest explosion since the big bang was 2 black hole core (or cold) stars hit together. it is them a simple conclusion that what they claim produced magical WAVES to make a big bang (hot dense state)...what was hot and what was dense? ENERGY moving faster than light speed by a factor of 80,000 times faster or more! Well nothing can do that BUT crushed by gravity atoms and crushed by gravity ANTI atoms.....well that is whol different story that can produce conditions to brake gravity 100% and for a short time spring all them atoms from crushed to free to expand..all at the same time! All matter and antimatter then changed to energy pure in waves and then cooled and slowed and spin and cycle to make stars and start the whole thing over....who knows? A universe might exist today on the other side that is antimatter and it makes stuff that gets loose and we make stuff that gets loose...one day might hit together and make another Universe like our OR like theirs. Ether way where did the hot dense state come from for the theory of the Big bang... what made them waves exist? What made them sub atomic exist? What made it so heat can happen or even density from waves (waves move at the speed of light in general...they can't be dense or hot..or is a ATOM state not subatomic)
i can make that happen , pay 10k in to my account i promise when you die he will be there doing your euology. i know Dicky, hes a good guy, he dont read yt comments though, i can tell him what you guys are saying. hes in his 60s live near me in new york ( i can get him to record something on tape in case he gone before you, which is likely if you in your 20s). hes an actor.
In the early 80's there was a TV show called "in search of" hosted by Leonard Nemoy. It would have episodes about everything from the loch ness monster to mental telepathy. I remember they covered every possible example of psychic phenomenon there was. From dogs finding missing children and psychics reading palms to a mother sensing their son was in a accident a couple states away. The show was very popular. Also the very idea that we could communicate with each other from some biological mutat
@ 12:53 "why do we live in a matter dominated universe?" We don't. Matter makes up 3-4% of our universe. Dark matter makes up 97%. We live in a dark matter dominated universe.
he meant in comparison with anti matter. not that matter its self dominates the universe. dark matter counts for 25% of the universe. 70% consists of dark energy
If everything is vibrations or waves, then it is not necessary to speak of matter or energy, then Creation is fundamentally based on this concept of vibration. The primeval vibration (before the limitation) can be described as infinite in time, infinite in all its aspects and possibilities, infinite in frequency and amplitude and existing in all time directions (omnitime). Unchanging, timeless and powerful to all limited vibrations in every bound power. It is the omnipotent definition.
It's all about 0s and 1s, + and -, isn't it? Repel and attract. Evade and encumber. I loved hearing that in the very beginning after the mega-bang, that such a small percentage (1%?) formed into matter that became the Universe. In all things in life, it's the energy we put into things that shows us what matters. I love how no matter how deeply you go, how minute them particle, everything is the same. For example, look at our solar system, from a great distance, it looks like an atom. You have universes within you. Our Universe is within Universes within other Universes.
The riddle of antimatter: "If the Big Bang created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, why didn't all of it annihilate together?" Well, what if the distribution of matter and antimatter in the universe is not uniform (each of the two forms clumping together, and only rarely coming in contact to annihilate)? And more important, what if we have already observed matter/antimatter annihilations on a cosmic scale? Gamma-ray bursts. Flashes of gamma rays associated with extremely energetic explosions. All of them were observed in distant galaxies, meaning that they happened a long time in the past. Most of them (the long bursts) are consistent with the model of a supernova or hypernova that collapses to form a neutron star, quark star, or black hole. And then, there are the short bursts. Well, what if the short bursts are caused by matter/antimatter annihilations? So, we would not see any matter/antimatter annihilation in our galaxy because it has already happened, billions of years ago, leaving only the residual matter to be seen. Other galaxies might have had an excess of antimatter instead of matter, so, when the annihilation took place, they only left the residual antimatter! And we might never know which galaxy is made of which substance, because a star made out of of antimatter would emit normal light, just like a star made out of matter!
In the grand scheme of things, you got it. We are not as important as what we like to think we are. Our mass is minuscule. Our time on earth is fleeting.
*Jason* __ Ok...you're right, this has fuck all to do with anti semitism......but the fact you even take the time to explain this juvenile 6th grade bullcrap "joke" .....seems pathetic......while we are here in awe of science trying to understand the core of our universe...........Unlike you "JasonJason" 🙄, it seems Mr. Rodstein turned out very well....
Yes, as far as we know, they are different. Matter is the opposite of anti-matter and as a simplification you can consider that they have opposite charge and annihilate on contact releasing energy. Dark matter is "normal" matter than only interacts through gravity and the weak force, making it directly undetectable. Through indirect speculation we think it exists, but we don't know for sure and there is a chance that dark antimatter can exist, maybe in a dark matter universe.
Especially when he does his Orson Welles impersonation. All he has to do is just talk normally. And then someone walks up to him and asks him what he wants to do tonight, and he replies "Same thing we do every night Pinky. Try to take over the world!"
*_It must be obvious by now, the expansion of what we call space, is proof that particles of positive and negative matter are being produced continuously, each one spinning at such speeds as to create an electrical force field... This force field is constantly pushing away particles from oppositely charged twin... As like particles clump together and grow bigger, they too behave the same way and occasionally collide with catastrophic results, but for the most part, are kept apart by magnet repulsion... Beyond that, like everyone else, I'm still formulating my understanding of the subject..._* 👀
Ajay Kumar Singh No, the Flying Spaghetti monster did not create the multi-verses and other dimensions. He has been too busy pushing us down with his noodley appendages to keep us on Earth. This can not be an easy job.
Frank Allen Almost 14 billion years ago Chuck Norris made Spaghetti, then it got lose and Made Multiverse. Today it's known as our God. THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER !
No, the Flying Spaghetti Monster Escaped while Chuck Norris was checking his mail. You see, the pot he was boiling the noodles in overheated (no safety valves back then) and blew up causing the big bang. That's how the Spaghetti Monster escaped. Since then he has been flying around pushing everything down so they don't fly off into space. I don't believe I'm writing this. I need a hobby.
When you see a painting do you know there's a painter? Or a building a builder? Why? Why couldn't paintings or buildings just appear out of nowhere? Yet you lean into believing that one day....nothing just decided to become something ...and wallah!....the universe??? I say that....not telling you about what religion....or ideas you should believe.....just some context....that's not even getting into the mathematical improbability of self replicating "life" arising from inert matter.
@@redriver6541 Could you define "absolute nothingness?" Why should there have been a nothing before something? God is something, so, where did God come from? Are saying that nothing just decided to become something... and wallah!.... an infinitely complex, hyper-intelligent universe-creator??? If the complexity of the Universe requires a creator, then an infinitely more complex creator must also require a creator. I hate to break it to you, but evolution is an inescapable fact of reality supported an insurmountable convergence of evidence from multiple, independent scientific fields. That so-called "mathematical improbability" claim of yours does not correlate with reality.
+paul skillman It's a good point to bring up. I have proposed an alternative view. I post the development of my model, The Big Drag, on my facebook timeline. Check it out. Heat, pressure and density have no meaning within the origin point. They emerged with the point's fractal bifurcation, which formed the multiverse manifold.
How about if there was just a universe of particals that eventually colested into masses that became so massive & compressed their centers started fussion.?
Mohannad Abdelqader That verse talks about all animals LOL don't try to fool people. Koran says that sun sets in a pond at night. quran.com/18/86 Koran says sun moves to a stopping point - quran.com/36/38
I want to know how the universe had a born on date?? What would have been there for it to be born into? Something was always there that has no beginning and no possible end. What would be there after? Always was always will be. Can not talk about "the big bang" without talking about how it even became to be or what was there before it.. Also it is "still growing", well into what!? And the bigger question what is it growing into? Space has been there forever literally and always will be there with no end! They keep talking about the universe beginning , it can not begin because what would be there before it "began" . What would be past "the end" ? It is impossible for a human brain or ANY artificial intelligence to ever understand. Everything is energy and that energy has always been in the universe and always will be. Cant make anything without it having been something else first . I challenge you to try to figure it out! It can not be explained!
If you religious people don't like science stop watching it and just let other people enjoy it I go to church every Sunday and I still like watching these videos
Here's a tip to people who are about to scroll down: relax. Close your eyes, and take a second to grab something you can squish, like a stress ball. You're probably going to need it. If you start to lose it, chant the phrase " cola and meal please, no bread". :)
Perhaps just like virtual particles form into a matter and antimatter pair, the big bang "popped" into existence this way too. The two universes may have had opposite forms of energy, but equal, whatever that means, thus allowing everything from nothing. Expansion must have occurred soon enough to keep each universe separated from the other. Any mathematicians or physicists care to run with this?
There has been a very simple answer that the standard model physicists still refuse to consider: gravity is a function of matter. That does not mean that gravity as we know it is a function of anti-matter. Rather anti-matter has the negative form of gravity. The rule is like matter attracts itself and repels unlike matter. Gravitational constructs in space (global clusters) can be either matter or antimatter. The presence of any large amount of anti-matter entering our global cluster is limited by gravitational repulsion. With this principle, the universe is whole, symmetry is restored. Dark energy is just the global clusters repelling clusters of different matter. The "weight" experiment explained in this video was not weight, it was mass. A true scientist would know the difference.
read Hannes Alfven's world-antiworlds: an electrolysis-like process separates the particle pairs, and annihilation would happen in a thin film, not large volumes
Oh stfu about political correctness. Not everything has to be about politics, just enjoy the damn video instead of bringing your right wing bullshit here.
Charge isn't the only difference. Any particle property that can be either positive or negative will be the opposite in antimatter, e.g. the baryon number and magnetic moment.
It's slightly more complicated than that. For once: you'd have to explain how they got all that antimatter. Black holes basicly form due to gravitational collapses of "ordinary" matter. So you'll always start out with a black hole made up of matter. To have them change to antimatter, you'd have to have a process that preferably feeds them antimatter. There is no known process for that since the universe is mainly made up of matter and you would have to specially produce antimatter to feed it. And then it would also not simply explode, but grow instead. The mass of an object is not only given by the mass of their constituents, but also ther energy. So if you dumped a chunk of matter into an antimatter black hole (or a chunk of antimatter into a matter black hole), they might anihilate with something inside the blackhole and produce a huge amount of energy. But since that energy cannot escape the black hole, it would simply get more massive ... In reality they can "shrink" due to Hawking radiation. That is: fluctuations near the even horizon of the black hole create pairs of particles. And these particles have some energy. Where did that energy come from? It's "borrowed" from the vacuum. And sometimes one of the particles flies off from the balck hole while the other falls into it. Since the energy has to be conserved, and there is some positive energy far away from the black hole produced (the escaped particle) and the black hole has swallowed some negative energy and "shrunken". It's a lot more complicated than that in reality, but that's the main point about it. I hope that helped a little ;)
***** Great comment! Thanks. 'you'd have to explain how they got all that antimatter' Could antimatter be created in the black hole, when hawking radiation rips space appart spewing the matter out as gamma rays, and keeping the antimatter in its core? Are black holes generally stable over time or slowly growing in mass? How does the 'borrowed' energy from vacuum return to its orignal state?
betadryl You're welcome :) Hawking radiation does not "rip space appart". It's actually as subtle as the heat radiation coming from an object slightly above room temperature in your room. It is also extremely low energetic. The perceived temperature of the radiation is inversely proportional to the mass of the black hole (the more massive it is, the "colder" the radiation). So the large black holes that are typically around in our galaxy actually absorb more radiation from the cosmological background than they emit from Hawking radiation. This means: even when these black holes do not absorb anything, they would grow extremely slowly. Hawking radiation generally only becomes important when either the black hole is very small (then it would emit really hot radiation) or when the universe becomes extremely old (so that the cosmic background is so extremely cold that even the largest black holes start to evaporate). But other than this really tiny effect: large black holes are very stable. Well yes, antimatter could be created in the black hole, but it wouldn't matter since you basicly notice only the gravity of the black hole as an outside observer (or, you would also notice if it was rotating or if it was charged, but let us keep it simple for now). The antimatter could also not escape the event horizon ... So it literally does not matter what is inside of the event horizon. Well, that's a good question. Generally the escaped particle will simply have positive energy while the other one has some negative energy. After falling though the event horizon of the black hole the particle with negative energy is forced towards the singularity in the center. On it's way there it will probably interact with some other particles (for instance photons) and pick up a lot of energy. The energy it picked up from the black hole is then basicly "paying" for the "energy debt" of the particle. If it hasn't interacted in the way to the singularity, it'll definately interact there and the same thing will happen. If you would like are more detailed explanation, there is basicly no way around doing some math ...
Its possible. If I'm not mistaken, it has a lot to do with virtual particles. If a virtual particle and its clone come into existence, they should immediately annihilate each other. But if they pop up near a black hole, one of the particles get captured by the black hole and as a result, the particles do not disappear out of existence. Because of this apparant violation of the conservation of energy, something has to pay to restore it, which comes from the energy of the black hole. This is where the concept of Hawking radiation comes from. A black hole will slowly evaporate as it captures more and more virtual particles that reduce its energy levels. This is my understanding, of course. I'm sure theres some stuff i said that isnt correct, so please let me know where i got my info wrong, so i can correct myself in the future.
Knowledge has been under control for thousands of years. The atom has two different size shells. A bigger and a smaller of electron orbitals. The bigger is matter and the slightly smaller anti-matter electron orbits. They don't like each other because they're opposite polarization and they keep themselves separated. When something happens they get to close to each other and forces push in opposite directions. This is the finishing work justification for action and reaction, Izaac Newton made.
They aren't that closely related (at least not as far as I know.) Antimatter is 'normal' matter, just with an opposite electrical charge. Dark matter is the name normally given to the 'missing mass' in the universe. The universe has much more mass than that which we see in the stars and galaxies. We don't know what type of matter makes up the extra mass, but we think it's spread fairly evenly throughout the universe. Therefore we assume that it's invisible, or 'dark'.
People have seen sufficient evidence of God, it's all around us but they have chosen to suppress the truth about God. My mental health is fine. Meanwhile, enjoy your life here on Earth. Once you're gone your time is up forever. God bless!
Since each have their own respective gravitational forces, given the correct amount of distance from one another and the gravitational forces are not strong enough to pull each other towards one another. The solar systems/galaxies are all affecting our position and all play a role in why planets don’t “fall” into one another.
The best explaination I have heard re Matter and antimatter is by Bruce Cathie Harmonics of the Universe. He says our Universe is not a constant. Our reality switches on and off between matter cycle and antimatter cycle at 144,000 times per second like a sine wave. The two never touch, if they did they would annihilate each other.
From what I understand, you can't destroy or create energy. I don't really understand much of it though. Antimatter is named so because when x matter collides with x antimatter both are gone. All that is left is the release of energy afterwards. E=MCsquared (wish I could do the little 2) is an equation to figure out how much energy is with a certain amount of mass. So times your mass by the speed of light squared and that's the amount of energy (I don't actually know lol)
Introducing the most ground-breaking story since Star Wars: He was a molecule He lived in the surf He was unpopular :-( His biggest dream: to get to the top of a WAVE THAT'S where the heroes were If you got there your name would be written in history But you could also slip into oblivion forever... If you're a sucker for a good hero story, go to Amazon Books, type: "The Little Molecule" (A Nicholas, Kindle 2013) & get ready for some serious fun. You'll never look at molecules the same way again.
Answer: space can and does move faster than light, otherwise the Universe could not have expanded so quickly into so large a space. It's the same reason why a "warp drive" is theoretically possible.
A change in electrical charge doesn't cause a change in reaction to gravity. Antimatter has since been shown to have positive mass and to react to gravity exactly as any other massive particle.
Antimatter is so unusual. To contain it you would need a airtight container and a magnetic field around the container. To keep it suspended in mid air. If antimatter comes into contact with anything. It will create a huge amount of energy and prity much explode.
If i understand correctly, if scientists somehow achieve to understand and mass produce antimatter atom particules, in some fields they could create stronger versions of what matter atoms create. According to the documentary, one of their use would be as a nuclear fuel for rockets that is many times more effective than nuclear fuels made of matter atoms. It's really cool.
You assume a nonsensical theory involving an exclusively terracentric presence of a magical will being exerted upon its own domain, yet paradoxically transcending its domain, not by influencing the heavenly realm but one body within it. All despite the sure lack of any tradition indicating that the sun ever fell or appeared to be falling to earth; and such an event being noteworthy. The historicity of this theory seems . . . unlikely. But your concept of gravitational theory deserves an award.
The slight imbalance between matter and antimatter is not accidental but the result of fine tuned design.Physical reality is mathematical in structure. Ramanujan's mathematics reveals black holes with double centers, explained away as the two ends of a wormhole. Is it possible for the matter falling into BH are transformed into anti-matter, existing on the holographic wall of the BH, where mass is preserved? If so then the mass of the BH should be twice that of all matter falling on it plus the mass of the sun that produced the BH. Our galaxy has trillions of stars and the BH at the center weighs just as much, WHY?
Well It is a very interesting idea. Its feasible that anti gravity is a repelling force rather than an attracting force, and if anti matter was interacting with matter, it would have to be through some indirect force to prevent constant annihilation of each other. I wonder what the relationship of the Higgs field is with anti matter, or if there is an anti his field...
Antimatter dominates because Space came from Counterspace, Space is a hologram. When Aether splits, Aether becomes electrons and positrons. The positrons enter Counterspace and are seen as Protons from Space. The electrons are still paired with a positron, except the positron is in Counterspace. Protons are the only so called particles in Space, that are in Counterspace. Like, blackholes in Space are really Counterspacial Sinks in Counterspace.
Perhaps because if we understand the building blocks of the Universe, we can accomplish things that will solve all of those ills (and more) in ways we can't even imagine right now. The ability to re-order matter and traverse vast distances in short periods are hallmarks of science-fiction and among those accomplishments which make up the "holy grail" of real science, because such capabilities would remove the need for most human conflict/greed/etc.
The sun (along with our planets in the solar system) also revolve around the supermassive blackhole (Sagittarius A*) in the center of our galaxy (the milky way galaxy). The galaxy as a whole is under the influence of its most direct neighbors (Virgo Supercluster). At least, for the time being until we 'drift' far enough away from other objects due to the 'metric expansion of space'. At some point it is possible that our galaxy will therefore move outside the sphere of influence of other gravity
From my unpublished book: Polarity and Anti-matter. The universe is an electrical system (as per Tesla), and matter in the universe has polarity; when it was created, matter when to one half, anti-matter to the other half; at the point of contact, there was a tremendous explosion that separated the two, so it wouldn't annihilate the universe. If my theory is correct, there should be a detectable background radiation from the explosion (there is, but it's believed to be just from the big bang), and a very large gap somewhere in space (there is, but no real explanation). On the other side of that gap, you will find all the anti-matter you want.
Your theory is garbage and doesn't make sense. What half? At the point of which contact? The universe is an electrical system, what does that even mean?
You can believe in a higher power all you like. My question is generally: If a higher power created the universe, who created the higher power? Did the high power just appear out of no where? Did an even higher power create it? I personally believe that our universe just drifted together. Stars and solar systems slowly clustered together into galaxies and galaxies slowly clustered into our universe. Where they came from, I don't know. But I believe we will know when we're meant to. =)
In some ways, it is. The graviton is still a theoretical elementary particle. Which is odd. I'd have almost expected the neutrino to be proven to exist and observed AFTER the graviton by virtue of it being a ghost particle and the graviton being the conductor of the strong force.
I think that in order to stop the positrons from disappearing, you'd have to hold them using symmetrically equivalent magnetic fields cast at 360* encasing those positrons, and subzero temperatures- which would slow the movement of the positrons. in theory..
Give us more documentaries like this!!
It's all mind over matter. I don't mind,so it doesn't matter.
Smartest comment I have read so far. It makes sense if you dont't think about it.
+Rey sosa lol!
+Rey sosa like he said, it doesnt matter.
EvilNeon I...don't disagree?
Rey sosa I counter your logic by substituting my own. :D
At the end of this video, the question is asked "Just what is it that could break symmetry, hence trigger creation?" [paraphrased]
To my mind, the much more intriguing question would be "just what type of field, or force, or event exists, or existed, that could bring into a physical realm, or appropriate vibrational/frequency state, a perfectly symmetrical ism/ion?" To me, this is, by orders of magnitude, a fantastically more difficult realization/state of matter/reality to create. Where there are an infinite number of ways to break symmetry, how many ways are there to create perfect symmetry? Zero? (not homo sapiens to create it...just anything, anyone, whatever)
I don’t know what it is about his voice for god sakes.... relaxing somehow
i want a playlist of all his documentaries VO'd to sleep to.
Deep voice speaking slightly slow = 😴
Similar to Orson Welles !
He has a name.. it's DICK RODSTIEN
the music in this video is very dissonant, borderline atonal. i like it. very trippy
Watched this high on marijuana 🍁 and shrooms 🍄and makes my mind blown away🤯✨🎆
do not muck about with antimatter indoors. always experiment in the open, your garden or in the road for example. wear gloves and goggles and an outdoors coat. shout "antimatter" to give people some warning proceed with confidence.
Also, be sure to have a water hose handy
Or if you're British,,, An hosepipe. :)
william Greene .... 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
And if you,re Cajun, some hot sauce. It might be good to eat.
well maybe don't experiment with antimatter "in the road"!? explains the huge potholes this winter...
Wait wait wait, a good science video on youtube that is in 1080p whow! Extraordinary!
...true! ...:D :D :)
TwippyTwilight I just switched mine over to 240p Its better that way.
Welcome to the world of SpaceRip.
Action movies
Spacerip makes very high quality videos.. I love this channel
One of the most interesting vids about dark matter I have seen in the last 10 years hands down😌👏👏👌👌
Pretty deep stuff !
I'm beginning to see the gravity of this situation...
Indeed... it's quite heavy stuff, as a matter of fact. c".)
n NH
Consequently the super-massive gravity of the situation can lead to the formation of a black hole.. tsk-tsk
Ba dum tiss
Nice
The commercial interruptions during these videos are getting ridiculous.
Have you not got adblock? I didn't have any commercial interruptions.
cry me a river
I'll see what I can find. Sometimes it attempts to interrupt for a commercial, but then freezes the video so I can't watch the whole thing.
Laughs in youtube premium. 😂
Thanks for posting this great video. One stands in awe against such greatness in our universe. We must pity those that confuse faith with the reality of nature. Faith is just that, faith. It can be compared to an empty dinner plate.
"Inward spherical wave fronts multiplying time dilation at right+angles compressing+4-0-4+-decompressing expanding sphere's now dividing gravity at right-angles."
What's the deal with those TruthContest comments? I see them on every single video that I click on. Do people actually buy into this shit?
+Alan Jay I wonder that too. Has kind of a scam/multi-level-marketing feel to it, with all the spam. Most of the comments are definitely bots - there's almost always a second comment saying "thanks for this" or something like that.
Big West Yeah, you can tell the comments are made by bots. It's always the EXACT same comment, letter for letter. I think it's a scam.
Alan Jay I agree, it's a weirdass scam though.
+Alan Jay it IS a scam.
+Alan Jay Of course a dumb-ass will buy into anything. I am pitching a game show in Hollywood right now that has people eating their own shit for cash, called "Bottoms Up"!! I dare them and then the dumb-asses risk possible death and certain illness to eat their own shit as I offer increasing amounts of money until they munch out!! Dumb-asses Unite!!!!!! All hail the Dumb-asses!!!!!!!!!!
"It starts from the point you began to draw/make it and ends when it connects back to that point" I'm not asking you about a circle "you've drawn" I'm asking you about the idea of a circle thats already drawn. Also 0 to 360 degrees denotes that something is turning on the same axis which isn't the case with a circle since you depart from the point you start and make a loop. Also by saying that something ends where it starts as you did, you're indirectly affirming
Rewatching a lot of SpaceRip videos, I don't regret it.
This video was uploaded on my birthday
What do you think now that you've been working on this for 6 years?
@Scribble Scrable That was 7 years ago. I was very young back then, and anti-matter was really and still is, fascinating to me.
i want to be a space scientist and study astronomy when i grow up...!!!
What happend?
RIP.
Seriously, how you doing 5 years later?
Me too! I'm 33 years old...
He has ascended and no longer communicates in our primitive ways.
What an enlightened comment! Your PhD and at least two decades of studying particle physics are readily apparent!
Matter occupies the 3 dimensions we see/understand and anti matter occupies the other dimensions (6?) that we cannot see - that is what I have deduced from watching these informative vids
If matter forms mass, could it go to reason that anti matter cannot form mass? Instead perpetually forcing apart? And if this be the case, and the fact that more anti matter is produced each day throughout the universe is considered, could it case the universe as we know it to expand faster and faster each day as we see?
This is what I want, I like to hear people's random theories.. Scientists only research what they're funded to and I think it's a huge waste.
my thought is similar to you.If matter can form mass(gravity as property) than antimatter can form antimass(antigravity as property), but due to very initial property of antigravity they cannot concentrete but tend to disperse. they should be distributed in entire space prabably 1unit/cubic meter or km or similar and it will not easy to detect.I have video regarding this on youtube
DonatoThomas
you have not a clue.
black hole cores are gravity made things that hold the exact potential to make space time exactly as we have it... to not go to black hole cores for the big bang is to say GOD DID IT...choose! Antimatter and matter make PURE ENERGY and the whole Universe space time you know is the LEFT OVERS not the antimatter or the matter but what was left over in matter... and things that come out of black hole cores become HYDROGEN and HYDROGEN made this Universe space time you know... no one can prove me wrong on this planet...do not try! it is ether a magical wave or 2 spheres... choose stupidity of waves or God did it or 2 black hole cores hit and one of them was made of antimatter...just happens to fit 100% correct to all events from the big bang to this day... so it has to be wrong???? grow up people!
NO you can't think anti matter is reversed in function IT IS NOT! All matter and anti matter act ALMOST exactly the same... a table in antimatter is exactly the same as one in matter but would explode in the AIR just touching atoms in the matter air...the composition of anti matter is simple positive and negative reversal of positions... on contact with the opposed on it turns each into energy instantly... they decompose to basic part of energy... then no one is really sure...since nothing is lost in Universe...what kind of energies were produced is now interesting to humans...light to heavy atoms are desired to be tested. For You to be asking me the question say you did not go look any of it up to learn it and know it for the rest of your life...why no just go learn how it works from the experts and pictures and all. Worth the effort!
NO, youir choices are God did from NOTHING or something made the things that made the big bang happen... and them things had to exist before the BIG BANG... so them things had to be spheres. Only by colliding 2 spheres can we make an event of such scale. the largest explosion since the big bang was 2 black hole core (or cold) stars hit together. it is them a simple conclusion that what they claim produced magical WAVES to make a big bang (hot dense state)...what was hot and what was dense? ENERGY moving faster than light speed by a factor of 80,000 times faster or more! Well nothing can do that BUT crushed by gravity atoms and crushed by gravity ANTI atoms.....well that is whol different story that can produce conditions to brake gravity 100% and for a short time spring all them atoms from crushed to free to expand..all at the same time! All matter and antimatter then changed to energy pure in waves and then cooled and slowed and spin and cycle to make stars and start the whole thing over....who knows? A universe might exist today on the other side that is antimatter and it makes stuff that gets loose and we make stuff that gets loose...one day might hit together and make another Universe like our OR like theirs. Ether way where did the hot dense state come from for the theory of the Big bang... what made them waves exist? What made them sub atomic exist? What made it so heat can happen or even density from waves (waves move at the speed of light in general...they can't be dense or hot..or is a ATOM state not subatomic)
I want this narrator to do my eulogy.
Is it possible to get the narrators name?
Dick Rodstein. It says so in the closing credits.
i can make that happen , pay 10k in to my account i promise when you die he will be there doing your euology. i know Dicky, hes a good guy, he dont read yt comments though, i can tell him what you guys are saying. hes in his 60s live near me in new york ( i can get him to record something on tape in case he gone before you, which is likely if you in your 20s). hes an actor.
Sounds a lot like James Cromwell, but it ain't.
I don't want a eulogy.
In the early 80's there was a TV show called "in search of" hosted by Leonard Nemoy. It would have episodes about everything from the loch ness monster to mental telepathy. I remember they covered every possible example of psychic phenomenon there was. From dogs finding missing children and psychics reading palms to a mother sensing their son was in a accident a couple states away. The show was very popular. Also the very idea that we could communicate with each other from some biological mutat
If there's antimatter then there's is anti-human life...described as Politicians.
My Theory is that at the moment of creation, anti-matter moved backwards in time.
Interesting 🧐🤔 can you explain it more?
@ 12:53 "why do we live in a matter dominated universe?"
We don't. Matter makes up 3-4% of our universe. Dark matter makes up 97%. We live in a dark matter dominated universe.
he meant in comparison with anti matter. not that matter its self dominates the universe. dark matter counts for 25% of the universe. 70% consists of dark energy
Cool!! Must watch!
Im a Christian and i love science. You can get along with both if you so choose
What happened to the energy from those early matter\antimatter reactions?
where is Morgan Freeman
maybe at antimatter dimension
Lol
Indie Gozal lol
Mason Gratias lol
In Antarctica, riding a penguin.
If everything is vibrations or waves, then it is not necessary to speak of matter or energy, then Creation is fundamentally based on this concept of vibration. The primeval vibration (before the limitation) can be described as infinite in time, infinite in all its aspects and possibilities, infinite in frequency and amplitude and existing in all time directions (omnitime). Unchanging, timeless and powerful to all limited vibrations in every bound power. It is the omnipotent definition.
It's all about 0s and 1s, + and -, isn't it? Repel and attract. Evade and encumber. I loved hearing that in the very beginning after the mega-bang, that such a small percentage (1%?) formed into matter that became the Universe. In all things in life, it's the energy we put into things that shows us what matters. I love how no matter how deeply you go, how minute them particle, everything is the same. For example, look at our solar system, from a great distance, it looks like an atom. You have universes within you. Our Universe is within Universes within other Universes.
The riddle of antimatter: "If the Big Bang created equal amounts of matter and antimatter, why didn't all of it annihilate together?"
Well, what if the distribution of matter and antimatter in the universe is not uniform (each of the two forms clumping together, and only rarely coming in contact to annihilate)? And more important, what if we have already observed matter/antimatter annihilations on a cosmic scale?
Gamma-ray bursts. Flashes of gamma rays associated with extremely energetic explosions. All of them were observed in distant galaxies, meaning that they happened a long time in the past. Most of them (the long bursts) are consistent with the model of a supernova or hypernova that collapses to form a neutron star, quark star, or black hole.
And then, there are the short bursts. Well, what if the short bursts are caused by matter/antimatter annihilations? So, we would not see any matter/antimatter annihilation in our galaxy because it has already happened, billions of years ago, leaving only the residual matter to be seen. Other galaxies might have had an excess of antimatter instead of matter, so, when the annihilation took place, they only left the residual antimatter! And we might never know which galaxy is made of which substance, because a star made out of of antimatter would emit normal light, just like a star made out of matter!
🤯
his name is SAM TING? or was his name the same as the man before him?
In the grand scheme of things, you got it. We are not as important as what we like to think we are.
Our mass is minuscule.
Our time on earth is fleeting.
How sensitive the interior walls of the detectors must be to pick up the presence of subatomic particles from a few atoms
Anti-matter can have reverse effects of gravity? Hm, maybe it has something to do with Dark Energy, and matter as well.
Dick Rodstein... Such an unfortunate name to attend a public high-school with.
Bob Jones more unfortunate than Bob Jones?
***** His name is Dick Rod... stein
And this ain't my name. Lol
+Bob Jones No kidding. But what a voice. He and Jay O. Sanders are my favorite narrators.
+Bob Jones scrolled to long looking for this comment!
*Jason* __ Ok...you're right, this has fuck all to do with anti semitism......but the fact you even take the time to explain this juvenile 6th grade bullcrap "joke" .....seems pathetic......while we are here in awe of science trying to understand the core of our universe...........Unlike you "JasonJason" 🙄, it seems Mr. Rodstein turned out very well....
Thanks for uploading! Cheers
Yes, as far as we know, they are different.
Matter is the opposite of anti-matter and as a simplification you can consider that they have opposite charge and annihilate on contact releasing energy.
Dark matter is "normal" matter than only interacts through gravity and the weak force, making it directly undetectable. Through indirect speculation we think it exists, but we don't know for sure and there is a chance that dark antimatter can exist, maybe in a dark matter universe.
Dirac's original gut feeling was correct, he suspected that the electron might be the anti proton. Now I can prove he was right.
This narrator must be great at parties.
Especially when he does his Orson Welles impersonation. All he has to do is just talk normally. And then someone walks up to him and asks him what he wants to do tonight, and he replies "Same thing we do every night Pinky. Try to take over the world!"
somebody knows his name?
Fantastic narration by Mr. Rothstein.
Agreed. Mr. Rothstein you did a great job.
*_It must be obvious by now, the expansion of what we call space, is proof that particles of positive and negative matter are being produced continuously, each one spinning at such speeds as to create an electrical force field... This force field is constantly pushing away particles from oppositely charged twin... As like particles clump together and grow bigger, they too behave the same way and occasionally collide with catastrophic results, but for the most part, are kept apart by magnet repulsion... Beyond that, like everyone else, I'm still formulating my understanding of the subject..._* 👀
Everybody knows that Flying Spaggeti Monster created Multi-verse and all Dimensions.
Why do people even argue against the most obvious thing ?
Rofl best answer ever.
Ajay Kumar Singh No, the Flying Spaghetti monster did not create the multi-verses and other dimensions. He has been too busy pushing us down with his noodley appendages to keep us on Earth.
This can not be an easy job.
Frank Allen
Almost 14 billion years ago Chuck Norris made Spaghetti, then it got lose and Made Multiverse.
Today it's known as our God.
THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER !
No, the Flying Spaghetti Monster Escaped while Chuck Norris was checking his mail. You see, the pot he was boiling the noodles in overheated (no safety valves back then) and blew up causing the big bang. That's how the Spaghetti Monster escaped. Since then he has been flying around pushing everything down so they don't fly off into space.
I don't believe I'm writing this.
I need a hobby.
Frank Allen
You already have one.
Making fun with keyboard warriors.
"There's holes in all of them, they aren't any more sensible than believing in God"
Really? At least these theories have evidence supporting them.
When you see a painting do you know there's a painter? Or a building a builder? Why? Why couldn't paintings or buildings just appear out of nowhere? Yet you lean into believing that one day....nothing just decided to become something ...and wallah!....the universe???
I say that....not telling you about what religion....or ideas you should believe.....just some context....that's not even getting into the mathematical improbability of self replicating "life" arising from inert matter.
@@redriver6541
Could you define "absolute nothingness?"
Why should there have been a nothing before something?
God is something, so, where did God come from? Are saying that nothing just decided to become something... and wallah!.... an infinitely complex, hyper-intelligent universe-creator???
If the complexity of the Universe requires a creator, then an infinitely more complex creator must also require a creator.
I hate to break it to you, but evolution is an inescapable fact of reality supported an insurmountable convergence of evidence from multiple, independent scientific fields. That so-called "mathematical improbability" claim of yours does not correlate with reality.
@@ominous-omnipresent-they give this a watch guy. I'm not typing all this out.
ua-cam.com/video/noj4phMT9OE/v-deo.html
How crazy to think that that one of each billioen particles of matter survived have created everything we know/see
I've notice the "Skip Ad" button is being phazed out.
'"The universe began hot" Where did the heat come from?
+paul skillman we don't explain anything with the big bang, we just know it happen.... now we need to find why
+paul skillman It's a good point to bring up. I have proposed an alternative view. I post the development of my model, The Big Drag, on my facebook timeline. Check it out. Heat, pressure and density have no meaning within the origin point. They emerged with the point's fractal bifurcation, which formed the multiverse manifold.
How about if there was just a universe of particals that eventually colested into masses that became so massive & compressed their centers started fussion.?
where did the universe come from?
+paul skillman That would make it too easy to understand ;)
I'd love to see 100 grams of electrons and positrons annihilate each other, from a distance of course.... lol🤣🤣
At what distance would you feel safe, Chris?
@Greg Moonen as far away as i was when they actually ignited it....and not merely far away in distance (space), but in time, as well....
@Greg Moonen that being said, 100 grams of antimatter, as posited by mr zimmerman, has orders of magnitude more explosive power than the tsar bomb
@Greg Moonen 1/1,000,000,000 (one billionth) of a gram of positrons contains the explosive power of 80 pounds/38 kilograms of TNT
@Greg Moonen i did not say you were...in fact, in your original post, you drew no correlation between the tsar bomb and 100 grams of antimatter
A "Do Not Feed The Trolls" law is a good start. The guy who invents a universal troll filter will make billions.
“And of everything we created a pair, that perhaps you may remember.” (Qur'an 51:49)
"I am calling bullshit on this one!" (Yo momma 69:666)
Mohannad Abdelqader That verse talks about all animals LOL don't try to fool people. Koran says that sun sets in a pond at night. quran.com/18/86
Koran says sun moves to a stopping point - quran.com/36/38
And if life is everywhere, even in a drop of water. Everything can happen!!!
I want to know how the universe had a born on date?? What would have been there for it to be born into? Something was always there that has no beginning and no possible end. What would be there after? Always was always will be. Can not talk about "the big bang" without talking about how it even became to be or what was there before it.. Also it is "still growing", well into what!? And the bigger question what is it growing into? Space has been there forever literally and always will be there with no end! They keep talking about the universe beginning , it can not begin because what would be there before it "began" . What would be past "the end" ? It is impossible for a human brain or ANY artificial intelligence to ever understand. Everything is energy and that energy has always been in the universe and always will be. Cant make anything without it having been something else first . I challenge you to try to figure it out! It can not be explained!
It can be explained. instead of the Big Bang Theory, check out Clif High's Explaination called the Little Blip Theory for the creation of Matter.
Just like UA-cam hasn't existed forever, similarly the universe had to be created out of something at some point in time.
If you religious people don't like science stop watching it and just let other people enjoy it I go to church every Sunday and I still like watching these videos
Here's a tip to people who are about to scroll down: relax. Close your eyes, and take a second to grab something you can squish, like a stress ball. You're probably going to need it.
If you start to lose it, chant the phrase " cola and meal please, no bread".
:)
does any of this really matter........huehuehuehue
Could it be that the antimatter went into another universe during these annihilations?
The probability is almost negligible. Because then you can not say that every point in universe is the centre of universe. Check the image at 12:39.
Perhaps just like virtual particles form into a matter and antimatter pair, the big bang "popped" into existence this way too. The two universes may have had opposite forms of energy, but equal, whatever that means, thus allowing everything from nothing. Expansion must have occurred soon enough to keep each universe separated from the other. Any mathematicians or physicists care to run with this?
There has been a very simple answer that the standard model physicists still refuse to consider: gravity is a function of matter. That does not mean that gravity as we know it is a function of anti-matter. Rather anti-matter has the negative form of gravity. The rule is like matter attracts itself and repels unlike matter. Gravitational constructs in space (global clusters) can be either matter or antimatter. The presence of any large amount of anti-matter entering our global cluster is limited by gravitational repulsion. With this principle, the universe is whole, symmetry is restored. Dark energy is just the global clusters repelling clusters of different matter. The "weight" experiment explained in this video was not weight, it was mass. A true scientist would know the difference.
read Hannes Alfven's world-antiworlds: an electrolysis-like process separates the particle pairs, and annihilation would happen in a thin film, not large volumes
I explore the universe with the finest instrument known to man, fueled by DMT ;-)
joe rogan approves
I love how these excellent videos always talk about "we" when most people don't know the names of the planets? Got to love this "inclusive PC" BS!
Oh stfu about political correctness. Not everything has to be about politics, just enjoy the damn video instead of bringing your right wing bullshit here.
Charge isn't the only difference. Any particle property that can be either positive or negative will be the opposite in antimatter, e.g. the baryon number and magnetic moment.
Turn the music down; it's too LOUD.
Other than that, great video, as are all the Space Rip videos.
I don't see what purpose the music serves
To get High with....Ganja Bro!
Could black holes consist of antimatter? Spewing out matter until a collapse at some point happens, resulting in a massive chain reaction / explosion.
It's slightly more complicated than that.
For once: you'd have to explain how they got all that antimatter. Black holes basicly form due to gravitational collapses of "ordinary" matter. So you'll always start out with a black hole made up of matter.
To have them change to antimatter, you'd have to have a process that preferably feeds them antimatter. There is no known process for that since the universe is mainly made up of matter and you would have to specially produce antimatter to feed it. And then it would also not simply explode, but grow instead. The mass of an object is not only given by the mass of their constituents, but also ther energy. So if you dumped a chunk of matter into an antimatter black hole (or a chunk of antimatter into a matter black hole), they might anihilate with something inside the blackhole and produce a huge amount of energy. But since that energy cannot escape the black hole, it would simply get more massive ...
In reality they can "shrink" due to Hawking radiation. That is: fluctuations near the even horizon of the black hole create pairs of particles. And these particles have some energy. Where did that energy come from? It's "borrowed" from the vacuum. And sometimes one of the particles flies off from the balck hole while the other falls into it. Since the energy has to be conserved, and there is some positive energy far away from the black hole produced (the escaped particle) and the black hole has swallowed some negative energy and "shrunken". It's a lot more complicated than that in reality, but that's the main point about it.
I hope that helped a little ;)
***** Great comment! Thanks. 'you'd have to explain how they got all that antimatter' Could antimatter be created in the black hole, when hawking radiation rips space appart spewing the matter out as gamma rays, and keeping the antimatter in its core? Are black holes generally stable over time or slowly growing in mass? How does the 'borrowed' energy from vacuum return to its orignal state?
betadryl
You're welcome :)
Hawking radiation does not "rip space appart". It's actually as subtle as the heat radiation coming from an object slightly above room temperature in your room. It is also extremely low energetic. The perceived temperature of the radiation is inversely proportional to the mass of the black hole (the more massive it is, the "colder" the radiation). So the large black holes that are typically around in our galaxy actually absorb more radiation from the cosmological background than they emit from Hawking radiation. This means: even when these black holes do not absorb anything, they would grow extremely slowly. Hawking radiation generally only becomes important when either the black hole is very small (then it would emit really hot radiation) or when the universe becomes extremely old (so that the cosmic background is so extremely cold that even the largest black holes start to evaporate).
But other than this really tiny effect: large black holes are very stable.
Well yes, antimatter could be created in the black hole, but it wouldn't matter since you basicly notice only the gravity of the black hole as an outside observer (or, you would also notice if it was rotating or if it was charged, but let us keep it simple for now). The antimatter could also not escape the event horizon ...
So it literally does not matter what is inside of the event horizon.
Well, that's a good question. Generally the escaped particle will simply have positive energy while the other one has some negative energy. After falling though the event horizon of the black hole the particle with negative energy is forced towards the singularity in the center. On it's way there it will probably interact with some other particles (for instance photons) and pick up a lot of energy. The energy it picked up from the black hole is then basicly "paying" for the "energy debt" of the particle. If it hasn't interacted in the way to the singularity, it'll definately interact there and the same thing will happen.
If you would like are more detailed explanation, there is basicly no way around doing some math ...
Its possible. If I'm not mistaken, it has a lot to do with virtual particles. If a virtual particle and its clone come into existence, they should immediately annihilate each other. But if they pop up near a black hole, one of the particles get captured by the black hole and as a result, the particles do not disappear out of existence. Because of this apparant violation of the conservation of energy, something has to pay to restore it, which comes from the energy of the black hole. This is where the concept of Hawking radiation comes from. A black hole will slowly evaporate as it captures more and more virtual particles that reduce its energy levels.
This is my understanding, of course. I'm sure theres some stuff i said that isnt correct, so please let me know where i got my info wrong, so i can correct myself in the future.
Teddy Catnip
Read my post from the 23rd ... or the wikipedia article on it ;)
so many dumb comments on here.
Knowledge has been under control for thousands of years. The atom has two different size shells. A bigger and a smaller of electron orbitals. The bigger is matter and the slightly smaller anti-matter electron orbits. They don't like each other because they're opposite polarization and they keep themselves separated. When something happens they get to close to each other and forces push in opposite directions. This is the finishing work justification for action and reaction, Izaac Newton made.
They aren't that closely related (at least not as far as I know.) Antimatter is 'normal' matter, just with an opposite electrical charge. Dark matter is the name normally given to the 'missing mass' in the universe. The universe has much more mass than that which we see in the stars and galaxies. We don't know what type of matter makes up the extra mass, but we think it's spread fairly evenly throughout the universe. Therefore we assume that it's invisible, or 'dark'.
Science is the mother of all religion
Jay Singh Wisdom! Then you may understand this too: "God created us and we created God."
Yes absolutely :)
Jay Singh Science isn't a religion.
thetruepure2 But it's a believe system very similar to religion. Upon that it always has been used to influence public opinion.
***** It is NOT a belief system.
Science is a tool that we use to discern truths about the world we live in.
Sounds like science fiction... You could believe in this crap without doubt and can't even comprehend the existence of a God? Lol
WE HAVE CREATED ANTIMATTER GAY ASS FUCK WHILE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF GOD SO STFU
+jim speiser Yes we have...
+jim speiser except we have created it in the large hadron collider and other particle accelerators
+jim speiser We actually did create it, we didn't find antimatter, but it was created via the Large Hadron Collider
People have seen sufficient evidence of God, it's all around us but they have chosen to suppress the truth about God. My mental health is fine. Meanwhile, enjoy your life here on Earth. Once you're gone your time is up forever. God bless!
Since each have their own respective gravitational forces, given the correct amount of distance from one another and the gravitational forces are not strong enough to pull each other towards one another. The solar systems/galaxies are all affecting our position and all play a role in why planets don’t “fall” into one another.
The best explaination I have heard re Matter and antimatter is by Bruce Cathie Harmonics of the Universe. He says our Universe is not a constant. Our reality switches on and off between matter cycle and antimatter cycle at 144,000 times per second like a sine wave. The two never touch, if they did they would annihilate each other.
I believe that anti-matter fuels reality television.
From what I understand, you can't destroy or create energy. I don't really understand much of it though. Antimatter is named so because when x matter collides with x antimatter both are gone. All that is left is the release of energy afterwards. E=MCsquared (wish I could do the little 2) is an equation to figure out how much energy is with a certain amount of mass. So times your mass by the speed of light squared and that's the amount of energy (I don't actually know lol)
Actually, we are living in an anti-matter universe where all matter seems missing.
I"m sad that the video didn't look further into that guy's theory
it seems to have so much more potential
Introducing the most ground-breaking story since Star Wars:
He was a molecule
He lived in the surf
He was unpopular :-(
His biggest dream: to get to the top of a WAVE
THAT'S where the heroes were
If you got there your name would be written in history
But you could also slip into oblivion forever...
If you're a sucker for a good hero story, go to Amazon Books, type: "The Little Molecule" (A Nicholas, Kindle 2013) & get ready for some serious fun.
You'll never look at molecules the same way again.
Answer: space can and does move faster than light, otherwise the Universe could not have expanded so quickly into so large a space. It's the same reason why a "warp drive" is theoretically possible.
Damn that was interesting. Awesome!
A change in electrical charge doesn't cause a change in reaction to gravity. Antimatter has since been shown to have positive mass and to react to gravity exactly as any other massive particle.
Antimatter is so unusual. To contain it you would need a airtight container and a magnetic field around the container. To keep it suspended in mid air. If antimatter comes into contact with anything. It will create a huge amount of energy and prity much explode.
What an excellent doc.
If i understand correctly, if scientists somehow achieve to understand and mass produce antimatter atom particules, in some fields they could create stronger versions of what matter atoms create. According to the documentary, one of their use would be as a nuclear fuel for rockets that is many times more effective than nuclear fuels made of matter atoms. It's really cool.
how am I here right now... I started at buzzfeed fast food taste tests... now I'm *here*
well better here than there. buzzfeed is cancer.
You assume a nonsensical theory involving an exclusively terracentric presence of a magical will being exerted upon its own domain, yet paradoxically transcending its domain, not by influencing the heavenly realm but one body within it. All despite the sure lack of any tradition indicating that the sun ever fell or appeared to be falling to earth; and such an event being noteworthy.
The historicity of this theory seems . . . unlikely.
But your concept of gravitational theory deserves an award.
The slight imbalance between matter and antimatter is not accidental but the result of fine tuned design.Physical reality is mathematical in structure. Ramanujan's mathematics reveals black holes with double centers, explained away as the two ends of a wormhole. Is it possible for the matter falling into BH are transformed into anti-matter, existing on the holographic wall of the BH, where mass is preserved? If so then the mass of the BH should be twice that of all matter falling on it plus the mass of the sun that produced the BH. Our galaxy has trillions of stars and the BH at the center weighs just as much, WHY?
Beautiful description :-)
Well It is a very interesting idea. Its feasible that anti gravity is a repelling force rather than an attracting force, and if anti matter was interacting with matter, it would have to be through some indirect force to prevent constant annihilation of each other. I wonder what the relationship of the Higgs field is with anti matter, or if there is an anti his field...
Antimatter dominates because Space came from Counterspace, Space is a hologram. When Aether splits, Aether becomes electrons and positrons. The positrons enter Counterspace and are seen as Protons from Space. The electrons are still paired with a positron, except the positron is in Counterspace. Protons are the only so called particles in Space, that are in Counterspace. Like, blackholes in Space are really Counterspacial Sinks in Counterspace.
Perhaps because if we understand the building blocks of the Universe, we can accomplish things that will solve all of those ills (and more) in ways we can't even imagine right now. The ability to re-order matter and traverse vast distances in short periods are hallmarks of science-fiction and among those accomplishments which make up the "holy grail" of real science, because such capabilities would remove the need for most human conflict/greed/etc.
The sun (along with our planets in the solar system) also revolve around the supermassive blackhole (Sagittarius A*) in the center of our galaxy (the milky way galaxy). The galaxy as a whole is under the influence of its most direct neighbors (Virgo Supercluster). At least, for the time being until we 'drift' far enough away from other objects due to the 'metric expansion of space'. At some point it is possible that our galaxy will therefore move outside the sphere of influence of other gravity
From my unpublished book: Polarity and Anti-matter.
The universe is an electrical system (as per Tesla), and matter in the universe has polarity; when it was created, matter when to one half, anti-matter to the other half; at the point of contact, there was a tremendous explosion that separated the two, so it wouldn't annihilate the universe. If my theory is correct, there should be a detectable background radiation from the explosion (there is, but it's believed to be just from the big bang), and a very large gap somewhere in space (there is, but no real explanation). On the other side of that gap, you will find all the anti-matter you want.
Your theory is garbage and doesn't make sense. What half? At the point of which contact? The universe is an electrical system, what does that even mean?
I've solved the riddle of anti-matter: There isn't any. There's only matter.
Ok, everyone can go home now.
In the case of explaining the creation of the universe and how it works, that's just what every theory is. A half assed hypothesis.
Don't give up. we all started this way.
We know for a fact our matter is positively charged, and that's why we call antimatter exactly that, because it's negatively charged.
You can believe in a higher power all you like. My question is generally: If a higher power created the universe, who created the higher power? Did the high power just appear out of no where? Did an even higher power create it?
I personally believe that our universe just drifted together. Stars and solar systems slowly clustered together into galaxies and galaxies slowly clustered into our universe. Where they came from, I don't know. But I believe we will know when we're meant to.
=)
In some ways, it is. The graviton is still a theoretical elementary particle. Which is odd. I'd have almost expected the neutrino to be proven to exist and observed AFTER the graviton by virtue of it being a ghost particle and the graviton being the conductor of the strong force.
I think that in order to stop the positrons from disappearing, you'd have to hold them using symmetrically equivalent magnetic fields cast at 360* encasing those positrons, and subzero temperatures- which would slow the movement of the positrons. in theory..