There is the idea, and I will try to remember what I read, that to rip a Quark apart, would release so much energy, that that could spawn an entirely new Big Bang, and every single universe that has ever existed has had every single Quark ripped apart to create an infinite number of universes, their characteristics determined by what flavor of Quark spawned it. It's fun to think about. A truly Skittles multi-verse. Live the Rainbow!
I know this is a joke but people who don't have a lot of knowledge about science know earth is spherical. It's obvious. It's common sense. It should be more like ignorant gullible people believe earth is flat.
2:04 Cool paradox! If you were saying these words a trillion years ago, then, a trillion years ago, you'd also be referring to you saying those words a trillion years ago, etc.
Wait, was this made before or after I asked for your opinion on this? (Trying to figure out if I was acknowledged, or if I was just being an idiot and the video was already made)
Where is the center of the universe? If everything started as a single point- the Planck Epoc - what were that points coordinates? Everyone says the Big Bang wasn’t an explosion in space, but of space. Can you help shed some light?
there is no center! i talk about this with a balloon analogy in one of the tutorials just before this one, though i forget which one. think of the universe as the surface of an expanding balloon. the surface has no center either.
A sphere (balloon) does have a central point where the x-y-z axis meet. If the universe expanded from a dot- that dot would be center in all three dimensions
no no, just imagine the surface of the balloon only, not the interior. we are analogizing two dimensions curved around a third to the three spatial dimensions of the universe wrapped around a fourth.
You mentioned the big rip. What if dark energy is a result of spacetime ripping itself apart on a smaller scale? Imagine a dry piece of paper being ripped apart and all the space between the pieces is dark energy?
The death of our universe is nothing if multiverse exist. And if multiverse exist it might imply that there are multiple big bangs. With the existence of multiple big bangs it implies that the singularity of each universe is definately not the actual point of origin.
We'd have to start defining terms like DeFacto speed, and QPU. Though, the calming menu music added in the background would be more than half an endorphin press imo
Collapsing ever inward, it won't be here it won't be heard. Our best and brightest figure........... That it will make an even bigger bang!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Does curvature apply to the dimensions of space that we're familiar with? Like if I drew a hypothetically perfect triangle, would its angles be something such as 180.00000000000000001 degrees?
I've always been curious about the seemingly commonalities between the Big Bang theory and those theories related to the inner workings of black holes. Both theories are centered on an abstract concept which involves what would seem to be an impossible amount of mass being contained within a singularity point of no volume. I have a hard enough time reconciling this concept in my mind assuming that singularities could simply be an isolated "glitch" in some sort of construct of the universe. But for a "glitch" as profound as a volume-less singularity which holds an unfathomable amount of matter to explain two very different astrologic processes which as far as we know hold no nexus to each other, that's exponentially less likely, at least in my head. Are there any standing theories which postulate that there might be a connection between the mechanics at play which triggered the Big Bang and the mechanics at play underneath the event horizon of a black hole? For instance, what if our universe exists within a black hole which formed in a different universe, and what we know as the Big Bang was actually the birth of this single black hole in another universe, when viewed from inside the event horizon? Maybe every black hole that exists in our universe somehow holds another distinct universe which itself would also include it's own black holes, and on and on. With something as insanely bizarre as black holes, there is no reason to think this would be possible or impossible. Not for nuthin', I'm not sure I'm totally comfortable with the false equivalence being inferred by my classifying black hole formations and the beginning of all both as simply 'processes'.... And.. I'm over it... 😃
Hi Can you make the video related how to use preposition with averbi di luogo in italiano. I m very confused when I use Al, dal, or article with averbi di luogo.
What about the possibility of all the black holes in the universe merging in a chaotic order and creating a big crunch this way, this one kind of convinces me.
Data points that there is not enough mass in the universe for that to happen, plus gravity decays over distance, so a punctual concentration of mass in a large universe does nothing in the larger picture. For a Big Crunch to happen you need lots (and I mean LOTS) of mass spread very evenly around the universe, to stop and reverse the expansion. This probably won't happen because of the already ongoing expansion and the fact that dark energy has the same density over time and space, while barionic matter and dark matter seem to scatter and dilute in space-time, further lessening the effects of their gravitational curvature.
@@kartoffel4050 Gravity decays over distance, but it never becomes zero. So how do we know that someday the engoing expansion will stop expanding and starts imploding. And while barionic and dark matter changes the values of gravitation, it doesnt make the values to zero.
@@xG4nd4lf Indeed, it never becomes zero, but if you want to cause a big crunch, you need the average gravitational distortion of the spacetime to be... let's call it "positive" and dark energy "negative"... so, you want an universe-wide relatively even positive distortion, with magnitude at least higher than dark energy's magnitude, so it means that, to stop the expansion and create a big crunch, we would need higher amounts of mass (baryonic or dark) than we currently have today, as our current data shows an already isotropic and homogeneous universe,. You won't overpower the expansion of the universe with a punctual mass of a gigantic black hole, no matter how big it is, because, eventually as you get away from the black hole (or any other massive body), dark energy would become dominant and expand spacetime anyway. My rough guess is that a Big Crunch would only happen in a very massive and very young universe, one which it's Big Bang didn't have enough energy to expand the clump of mass quick enough to overpower the gravitational field. I don't think a "mature" universe has the density to create a Big Crunch after it's early, denser stages. But, as I said, this is a rough guess.
Is there any reason to believe that there is just one universe? Or is there a possibility that just like our sun is just one out of many suns, all of which forming our galaxy, which again there are billions of and so on and so on so that there are billions of other universes around if we just zoom out enough? And then those universe clusters in turn are just a part of something even bigger and so on and so on?
This is how I see it: The entire universe (entire universe = observable universe + part of the universe outside the observable universe) contains everything that we could, _in principle_, interact with. As far as we can tell, the laws of physics are invariant in space and time, meaning that wherever and whenever you are in the Universe, these laws stay the same, and things behave the same way. If this is true, then stars outside the observable universe, but still inside the universe, work the same way that the sun and other closer stars work, even though we will never be able to observe them. And so does everything else. Parallel universes, by definition, are outside our entire universe. Since there is no way to interact with what's outside our universe, and we can't know what the laws of physics are out there, we can't make any assumption, let alone reach any conclusion about what's happening out there. All we can say is that, since our universe exists, it's _possible_ other universes do. So to answer your question, yes, it's entirely possible that there are billions of other universes, but we can't see them just by zooming out long enough, as we would always be inside our universe. If you want to learn more, I suggest reading Swedish-American physicist Max Tegmark's typology of multiverses: space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/PDF/multiverse_sciam.pdf
Since you say the universe might have been created due to quatum fluctuation (idk if that is how you spell it). What is the universe just dissapear because of the «anti universe»?
I suppose humanity can not make it through 200 billion years, but that does not make me feel really sad. What does, however, is the fact that people have a chance not to survive for even another 50-100 millions of years. That sounds ridiculous if we take the history of mammals into account. That would also mean we are the most violent monsters in a Solar system and possibly the Milky Way Galaxy (hence taking so many lives of animals, humans, even whole species and so much changing our home planet in not the most natural way and all of that for nothing) Your vids let me think of all those things as I watch, thanks for that, man! P. S. sorry if I'm bad at English, m from Ukraine
Who knows! We could kill ourselves in a decade, or we could evolve into the supreme beings of the universe over billions of years and figure out a way to prevent its death! Or anywhere in between.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains that's the most interesting part of it and one of quite big reasons to stay alive - to see where our brain leads us to, the feeling of being about to comprehend smth new is incredible. I hope you will continue motivating and teaching us this way! :D
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Hey Dave, I see you've covered how the stars and galaxies will succumb to their death. I was wondering if you could also cover how nebulas will also die. Every scientist I've been watching and listening to only talk about stars and galaxies. I was watching TIMELAPSE OF THE FUTURE: A Journey to the End of Time movie (it's on youtube) and the death of nebulas was never mentioned. I was wondering if the expansion of the universe has anything to do with that.
Well nebulae are not well-defined structures like stars and galaxies, nor do they go through complex evolution. So there is no basis with which to say that a nebula "dies". it's just a bunch of gas and dust. Sometimes stars form within them, sometimes they dissipate.
I didn't understand the concept of the flat universe, I mean we were discussing the shape of universe 1st was open universe (expanding forever) 2nd closed universe (collapsing) 3rd flat universe (delicately balanced in between) But because the universe is expanding (proved by the red shift) the universe should be the OPEN UNIVERSE not FLAT UNIVERSE
I like the uplifting note of a quantum fluctuation possibly creating a new universe after a big rip. Though, would such an event to take place not require spacetime to exist?
On a curved surface, can't you just adjust the lines of the triangle to compensate for the curvature? Or is that nonsensical because you can never observe the curvature of the universe from outside it?
@@SpydersByte I'm not saying that all lives, or even most of them, are good and (mostly) free of suffering, I'm saying that one of the _reasons_ why someone would want to live forever is that _living_ _is_ _better_ _than_ _not_ _living_ , all else being equal. Furthermore, the fact that one's life is full of constant pain, could be a reason why they'd want to live forever: that might give them more opportunities to make their life better. Which goes to show that it's all a matter of personal preferences: some people have reasons to want to live forever, some don't, and the reason I gave can be one of those reasons.
I need to ask, if dark energy is just becoming stronger and stronger, what causes it? Is it dark matter becoming dark energy, like normal matter can do in some condition i forgot? ps. i don't know a lot, i'm just thinking out loud.
Professor Dave: Let's talk about the end of the universe Professor Dave (*pulls out the gun out of his pocket, points it towards his head*) : as you can see, the end is near
@@hexa1905 well not really 😐after the big rig rip explains cause and effect but says nothing about galaxies colliding with one another 😐heat death means the universe to be at 0 kelvin meaning all the energy will stop however a problem with this is heat death violates a law that energy alone can NOT be created or destroyed 😐also heat death fails to explain well for one it says the universe will be cold and dark forever however it does not explain HOW or WHY the universe was CREATED if the universe as a whole was all ready cold and dark from the start 😑the only one that can clearly explain galaxy collisions the cause and effect of the Big Bang and the flow of time is the Big Crunch 😐now you may be like it’s like ➡️⬅️➡️⬅️however that’s misleading 😑but rather a new way of looking at it would be …..➡️↗️➡️↘️➡️➡️↗️➡️↘️➡️➡️↗️➡️↘️➡️
No, it does not. "Flat" in this context just means that the geometry of space is not curved (note: just space, not space-time), and geometry works as you would expect. Parallel lines stay parallel, the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees, and so on.
And just like that balloon, our universe could rip at any time with the ripped shell quickly contracting to a single point again. Just to be blow up again. Maybe God is chewing bubblegum?
Yea but problems with that for one what created the balloon in the first place 😐? And 2 ware did the balloon happen ? As your blowing up a balloon it only has 1 direction😐it ethers goes ⬆️⬇️⬆️⬇️ or ➡️⬅️➡️⬅️and that’s something the ballon analogy does not make since 😐also it says galaxy’s will move fater and faster away HOWEVER this could be very well the opposite 😐Beacuse like magnets they move the further one is the weaker the fore is but as you get closer the force of gravity increases and since we are just a product of nature to us it would be like as if the universe is expanding faster and will end in the big rip 😐
The sun isn't flat. The Earth isn't flat. The galaxy rotates as a sort of disk, but it's not completely flat. So, I just can't buy that the universe is flat.
Well none of those statements really have any bearing on the geometry of spacetime. It's a totally separate issue. And people such as you and me are not even remotely equipped to judge the validity of the consensus of the astrophysics community, so you're pretty much going to have to leave it at that.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Theoretical Astrophysics is a hobby of mine, and I think this is starting to make sense now, what Einstein was theorizing. The Universe being flat, not as in Geometry in a 2D representation, but as a way in which paths will never cross. Like if we take a Cubic area of space, however large or small, and we draw grids through it. Those parallel lines will never cross and will always have the same dimensions, no matter what. Anyway, thanks man! You made me think of something very interesting.
Correct, at least over the universe as a whole, as spacetime certainly does curve around massive objects. Of course I don't fully understand it myself, I'm just reporting the consensus!
The Death of the Universe: "Hey, hon? I found this other light switch in the bathroom." "What do you mean, 'another light switch'?" "I mean, this switch here turns the light on and off. But then, there's this other switch." "Huh. I see." "Should I flip it?" "Sure! I mean, really, what's the worst that can happen?" ........ "Oh, it just turns the bathroom fan off and on! I should have guessed." "You're silly, dear." The Next Day: "OH, GOD!! THE UNIVERSE IS ENDING!! IT HURTS! IT HURTS SO MUCH!!" "I HAVE ANTI-MATTER IN MY EYES! IT BURNS SO BAD! AAAAAARGH!!" "ETERNITY IS FOLDING IN ON ITSELF, CRUSHING MY BONES!!" "I JUST VOMITED BLOOD AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT!! OH, SWEET DEATH, I FEEL YOU NEAR..." "I'LL MISS YOU, MY LOVE! I'LL MISS... EVERYTHING...." The End
I vaguely recall having watched this video one trillion years ago or so.
Let’s talk about the end of the universe
>upbeat music plays
Broke: The Earth is flat
Woke: The Universe is flat
Super underrated channel
The universe ending definitely would be a "big rip."
R.I.P.
I get it 😁
There is the idea, and I will try to remember what I read, that to rip a Quark apart, would release so much energy, that that could spawn an entirely new Big Bang, and every single universe that has ever existed has had every single Quark ripped apart to create an infinite number of universes, their characteristics determined by what flavor of Quark spawned it.
It's fun to think about. A truly Skittles multi-verse. Live the Rainbow!
based on the current status of my air conditioner: defenetly hot.
Judging by the current status of my hair: totally flat!
Flat earth? Naaah, I'm on team flat Universe
Your videos are always helpfull keep it up. You always share great information. Thankyou.
people who don't know a lot about the science stuff: earth is flat
people who know a lot about the science stuff: universe might be flat
I know this is a joke but people who don't have a lot of knowledge about science know earth is spherical. It's obvious. It's common sense. It should be more like ignorant gullible people believe earth is flat.
2:04 Cool paradox! If you were saying these words a trillion years ago, then, a trillion years ago, you'd also be referring to you saying those words a trillion years ago, etc.
@@beeble2003 I know what you mean, but it does apply! An event cannot be the cause of itself!
That last sentence was deep.
Wait, was this made before or after I asked for your opinion on this?
(Trying to figure out if I was acknowledged, or if I was just being an idiot and the video was already made)
Check the date
@@smartart6841 its "one year ago" for him
6:10: What does critical density mean exactly?
Hello, the critical density is the density required to make the universe flat, i.e. it has the curvature of 0 in the Friedmann Equation.
i like this content
thankyou for these prof
Where is the center of the universe? If everything started as a single point- the Planck Epoc - what were that points coordinates? Everyone says the Big Bang wasn’t an explosion in space, but of space. Can you help shed some light?
there is no center! i talk about this with a balloon analogy in one of the tutorials just before this one, though i forget which one. think of the universe as the surface of an expanding balloon. the surface has no center either.
A sphere (balloon) does have a central point where the x-y-z axis meet. If the universe expanded from a dot- that dot would be center in all three dimensions
no no, just imagine the surface of the balloon only, not the interior. we are analogizing two dimensions curved around a third to the three spatial dimensions of the universe wrapped around a fourth.
yo fat momma is the center of the universe
From what I’m told, the area of the blown up balloon is technically the fourth dimension, thus our lack of comprehension...
According to some, it is possible to prevent heat death by signing a Faustian contract with a cute but amoral alien.
You mentioned the big rip. What if dark energy is a result of spacetime ripping itself apart on a smaller scale? Imagine a dry piece of paper being ripped apart and all the space between the pieces is dark energy?
interesting idea
And that therefore continues the expansion more rapidly, since there is less spacetime to exert pressure on other parts of the universe
Well for one we don’t know if dark energy or dark matter is even a thing 😐
The death of our universe is nothing if multiverse exist.
And if multiverse exist it might imply that there are multiple big bangs. With the existence of multiple big bangs it implies that the singularity of each universe is definately not the actual point of origin.
If you wanna know more about this read michio kaku's "parallel worlds"
It's around page 60 if i'm not wrong
This is where you should have said something about Parallel Universes.
Eh, too speculative, I try to keep it academic.
We'd have to start defining terms like DeFacto speed, and QPU. Though, the calming menu music added in the background would be more than half an endorphin press imo
Collapsing ever inward, it won't be here it won't be heard. Our best and brightest figure...........
That it will make an even bigger bang!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Does curvature apply to the dimensions of space that we're familiar with? Like if I drew a hypothetically perfect triangle, would its angles be something such as 180.00000000000000001 degrees?
I've always been curious about the seemingly commonalities between the Big Bang theory and those theories related to the inner workings of black holes. Both theories are centered on an abstract concept which involves what would seem to be an impossible amount of mass being contained within a singularity point of no volume. I have a hard enough time reconciling this concept in my mind assuming that singularities could simply be an isolated "glitch" in some sort of construct of the universe.
But for a "glitch" as profound as a volume-less singularity which holds an unfathomable amount of matter to explain two very different astrologic processes which as far as we know hold no nexus to each other, that's exponentially less likely, at least in my head.
Are there any standing theories which postulate that there might be a connection between the mechanics at play which triggered the Big Bang and the mechanics at play underneath the event horizon of a black hole? For instance, what if our universe exists within a black hole which formed in a different universe, and what we know as the Big Bang was actually the birth of this single black hole in another universe, when viewed from inside the event horizon?
Maybe every black hole that exists in our universe somehow holds another distinct universe which itself would also include it's own black holes, and on and on. With something as insanely bizarre as black holes, there is no reason to think this would be possible or impossible.
Not for nuthin', I'm not sure I'm totally comfortable with the false equivalence being inferred by my classifying black hole formations and the beginning of all both as simply 'processes'.... And..
I'm over it... 😃
Hi
Can you make the video related how to use preposition with averbi di luogo in italiano. I m very confused when I use Al, dal, or article with averbi di luogo.
I'm not worried about the death of the universe because after this final void a new universe will begin and whole show will start again.
The whole notion that the Universe "just is" makes zero sense and keeps me awake at night.
go count sheep instead
On the other hand, would it really make sense if no universe existed? It would be "simpler", but why should simplicity dictate things?
0:10 you can't say that without a short scene from the matrix following it 💻
What about the possibility of all the black holes in the universe merging in a chaotic order and creating a big crunch this way, this one kind of convinces me.
Data points that there is not enough mass in the universe for that to happen, plus gravity decays over distance, so a punctual concentration of mass in a large universe does nothing in the larger picture.
For a Big Crunch to happen you need lots (and I mean LOTS) of mass spread very evenly around the universe, to stop and reverse the expansion. This probably won't happen because of the already ongoing expansion and the fact that dark energy has the same density over time and space, while barionic matter and dark matter seem to scatter and dilute in space-time, further lessening the effects of their gravitational curvature.
@@kartoffel4050 Gravity decays over distance, but it never becomes zero. So how do we know that someday the engoing expansion will stop expanding and starts imploding. And while barionic and dark matter changes the values of gravitation, it doesnt make the values to zero.
@@xG4nd4lf Indeed, it never becomes zero, but if you want to cause a big crunch, you need the average gravitational distortion of the spacetime to be... let's call it "positive" and dark energy "negative"... so, you want an universe-wide relatively even positive distortion, with magnitude at least higher than dark energy's magnitude, so it means that, to stop the expansion and create a big crunch, we would need higher amounts of mass (baryonic or dark) than we currently have today, as our current data shows an already isotropic and homogeneous universe,.
You won't overpower the expansion of the universe with a punctual mass of a gigantic black hole, no matter how big it is, because, eventually as you get away from the black hole (or any other massive body), dark energy would become dominant and expand spacetime anyway.
My rough guess is that a Big Crunch would only happen in a very massive and very young universe, one which it's Big Bang didn't have enough energy to expand the clump of mass quick enough to overpower the gravitational field. I don't think a "mature" universe has the density to create a Big Crunch after it's early, denser stages. But, as I said, this is a rough guess.
What about heat death? The one in between?
Is there any reason to believe that there is just one universe? Or is there a possibility that just like our sun is just one out of many suns, all of which forming our galaxy, which again there are billions of and so on and so on so that there are billions of other universes around if we just zoom out enough? And then those universe clusters in turn are just a part of something even bigger and so on and so on?
This is how I see it: The entire universe (entire universe = observable universe + part of the universe outside the observable universe) contains everything that we could, _in principle_, interact with. As far as we can tell, the laws of physics are invariant in space and time, meaning that wherever and whenever you are in the Universe, these laws stay the same, and things behave the same way. If this is true, then stars outside the observable universe, but still inside the universe, work the same way that the sun and other closer stars work, even though we will never be able to observe them. And so does everything else.
Parallel universes, by definition, are outside our entire universe. Since there is no way to interact with what's outside our universe, and we can't know what the laws of physics are out there, we can't make any assumption, let alone reach any conclusion about what's happening out there. All we can say is that, since our universe exists, it's _possible_ other universes do.
So to answer your question, yes, it's entirely possible that there are billions of other universes, but we can't see them just by zooming out long enough, as we would always be inside our universe.
If you want to learn more, I suggest reading Swedish-American physicist Max Tegmark's typology of multiverses: space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/PDF/multiverse_sciam.pdf
All good things...
Since you say the universe might have been created due to quatum fluctuation (idk if that is how you spell it). What is the universe just dissapear because of the «anti universe»?
I suppose humanity can not make it through 200 billion years, but that does not make me feel really sad.
What does, however, is the fact that people have a chance not to survive for even another 50-100 millions of years.
That sounds ridiculous if we take the history of mammals into account.
That would also mean we are the most violent monsters in a Solar system and possibly the Milky Way Galaxy (hence taking so many lives of animals, humans, even whole species and so much changing our home planet in not the most natural way and all of that for nothing)
Your vids let me think of all those things as I watch, thanks for that, man!
P. S. sorry if I'm bad at English, m from Ukraine
Who knows! We could kill ourselves in a decade, or we could evolve into the supreme beings of the universe over billions of years and figure out a way to prevent its death! Or anywhere in between.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains that's the most interesting part of it and one of quite big reasons to stay alive - to see where our brain leads us to, the feeling of being about to comprehend smth new is incredible.
I hope you will continue motivating and teaching us this way! :D
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Hey Dave, I see you've covered how the stars and galaxies will succumb to their death. I was wondering if you could also cover how nebulas will also die. Every scientist I've been watching and listening to only talk about stars and galaxies. I was watching TIMELAPSE OF THE FUTURE: A Journey to the End of Time movie (it's on youtube) and the death of nebulas was never mentioned. I was wondering if the expansion of the universe has anything to do with that.
Well nebulae are not well-defined structures like stars and galaxies, nor do they go through complex evolution. So there is no basis with which to say that a nebula "dies". it's just a bunch of gas and dust. Sometimes stars form within them, sometimes they dissipate.
I didn't understand the concept of the flat universe, I mean we were discussing the shape of universe
1st was open universe (expanding forever)
2nd closed universe (collapsing)
3rd flat universe (delicately balanced in between)
But because the universe is expanding (proved by the red shift) the universe should be the OPEN UNIVERSE not FLAT UNIVERSE
No. Can you explain why it should be open?
I have a reminder set so I can be this late to this video, every trillion years, like clockwork.
how was critical density calculated for omega?
I like the uplifting note of a quantum fluctuation possibly creating a new universe after a big rip. Though, would such an event to take place not require spacetime to exist?
On a curved surface, can't you just adjust the lines of the triangle to compensate for the curvature? Or is that nonsensical because you can never observe the curvature of the universe from outside it?
What you mean? What will we get by that?
Good stuff but also heavy
What is the universe attracted to??
It is not attracted to anything. Please watch the video.
I personally really really want to live for ever :(.
Masochistic tendencies.
why would you want to do that?
@@SpydersByte Living is better than not living.
@@Vagabond-Cosmique is it though? Some people's lives are full of constant pain, whether that be mental or physical
@@SpydersByte I'm not saying that all lives, or even most of them, are good and (mostly) free of suffering, I'm saying that one of the _reasons_ why someone would want to live forever is that _living_ _is_ _better_ _than_ _not_ _living_ , all else being equal.
Furthermore, the fact that one's life is full of constant pain, could be a reason why they'd want to live forever: that might give them more opportunities to make their life better. Which goes to show that it's all a matter of personal preferences: some people have reasons to want to live forever, some don't, and the reason I gave can be one of those reasons.
but where is the heat death?
I need to ask, if dark energy is just becoming stronger and stronger, what causes it? Is it dark matter becoming dark energy, like normal matter can do in some condition i forgot?
ps. i don't know a lot, i'm just thinking out loud.
Dark energy and dark matter are different stuff, dark energy is there, we know it is
*laughs in Multiverse Theory*
the big R.I.P
Professor Dave: Let's talk about the end of the universe
Professor Dave (*pulls out the gun out of his pocket, points it towards his head*) : as you can see, the end is near
The best part is at 3:50 XD gotti
I kinda agree with the cycle of big bangs and big crunches theory.
It is by far the least likely of all.
@@hexa1905 Reason?
@@hexa1905 well not really 😐after the big rig rip explains cause and effect but says nothing about galaxies colliding with one another 😐heat death means the universe to be at 0 kelvin meaning all the energy will stop however a problem with this is heat death violates a law that energy alone can NOT be created or destroyed 😐also heat death fails to explain well for one it says the universe will be cold and dark forever however it does not explain HOW or WHY the universe was CREATED if the universe as a whole was all ready cold and dark from the start 😑the only one that can clearly explain galaxy collisions the cause and effect of the Big Bang and the flow of time is the Big Crunch 😐now you may be like it’s like ➡️⬅️➡️⬅️however that’s misleading 😑but rather a new way of looking at it would be …..➡️↗️➡️↘️➡️➡️↗️➡️↘️➡️➡️↗️➡️↘️➡️
@@dulyanaapoorvawanigasooriy1520 Did you even watch the video, he literally lists the evidence why the others are more likely.
Wait wait wait, when you say spacetime is flat, does that not imply it is 2D?
I think "flat" is just a word being used here in another sense than normally understood.
No, it does not.
"Flat" in this context just means that the geometry of space is not curved (note: just space, not space-time), and geometry works as you would expect. Parallel lines stay parallel, the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees, and so on.
There is an idea of a theory that suggests it will roll and become a single line
Flat Universe Society
We are all gonna die 😭😭😰
Well don’t worry about it 🙂in fact why worry about death if you were all ready dead before you were born?😐just saying
the universe is flat
And just like that balloon, our universe could rip at any time with the ripped shell quickly contracting to a single point again. Just to be blow up again. Maybe God is chewing bubblegum?
Yea but problems with that for one what created the balloon in the first place 😐? And 2 ware did the balloon happen ? As your blowing up a balloon it only has 1 direction😐it ethers goes ⬆️⬇️⬆️⬇️ or ➡️⬅️➡️⬅️and that’s something the ballon analogy does not make since 😐also it says galaxy’s will move fater and faster away HOWEVER this could be very well the opposite 😐Beacuse like magnets they move the further one is the weaker the fore is but as you get closer the force of gravity increases and since we are just a product of nature to us it would be like as if the universe is expanding faster and will end in the big rip 😐
The sun isn't flat. The Earth isn't flat. The galaxy rotates as a sort of disk, but it's not completely flat. So, I just can't buy that the universe is flat.
Well none of those statements really have any bearing on the geometry of spacetime. It's a totally separate issue. And people such as you and me are not even remotely equipped to judge the validity of the consensus of the astrophysics community, so you're pretty much going to have to leave it at that.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Theoretical Astrophysics is a hobby of mine, and I think this is starting to make sense now, what Einstein was theorizing. The Universe being flat, not as in Geometry in a 2D representation, but as a way in which paths will never cross. Like if we take a Cubic area of space, however large or small, and we draw grids through it. Those parallel lines will never cross and will always have the same dimensions, no matter what. Anyway, thanks man! You made me think of something very interesting.
Correct, at least over the universe as a whole, as spacetime certainly does curve around massive objects. Of course I don't fully understand it myself, I'm just reporting the consensus!
get- a new into/outo plsss
The Death of the Universe:
"Hey, hon? I found this other light switch in the bathroom."
"What do you mean, 'another light switch'?"
"I mean, this switch here turns the light on and off. But then, there's this other switch."
"Huh. I see."
"Should I flip it?"
"Sure! I mean, really, what's the worst that can happen?"
........
"Oh, it just turns the bathroom fan off and on! I should have guessed."
"You're silly, dear."
The Next Day:
"OH, GOD!! THE UNIVERSE IS ENDING!! IT HURTS! IT HURTS SO MUCH!!"
"I HAVE ANTI-MATTER IN MY EYES! IT BURNS SO BAD! AAAAAARGH!!"
"ETERNITY IS FOLDING IN ON ITSELF, CRUSHING MY BONES!!"
"I JUST VOMITED BLOOD AT THE SPEED OF LIGHT!! OH, SWEET DEATH, I FEEL YOU NEAR..."
"I'LL MISS YOU, MY LOVE! I'LL MISS... EVERYTHING...."
The End
... how old are you?
@@ogcaveman8120 I can't possibly see the relevance.
I don't think trying to prevent the end of the universe could ever be a good idea ☺