Eternal Inflation: The BEST MULTIVERSE Theory of Reality

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 11 чер 2024
  • Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/arvinash. Start your free trial TODAY so you can watch "The Cosmos" about the controversy between God vs Science. www.magellantv.com/series/sci... Also enjoy the rest of MagellanTV’s science collection.
    Background video on Cosmic Inflation:
    • Cosmic Inflation: The ...
    References:
    Alan Guth paper on Cosmic Inflation: t.ly/0yYW
    Stephen Hawking paper on detecting multiverse: t.ly/FBo7
    Eternal Inflation Wiki: t.ly/ClO7
    Chapters:
    0:00 - Why inflation? Why eternal inflation?
    1:46 - Science vs God documentary
    2:53 - How random radioactive decay is like inflation
    5:40 - Show multiple universes could form
    7:52 - Standard theory vs Eternal inflation theory
    9:24 - What is the nature of the other universes?
    10:28 - How do we prove the existence of multiverses?
    12:04 - Stephen Hawking's last paper
    12:26 - From Copernicus to insignificance
    Summary:
    The big bang model has some problems - homogeneity, flatness, and lack of magnetic monopoles.
    Cosmic Inflation occurred when the entire universe shortly after its beginning, expanded exponentially fast for a fraction of a second. One implication of this is that the universe on large scales may not be so homogenous. Inflation could have ended at different times in different places. This would mean that the universe is bigger and more complex than we realize. This concept is called ETERNAL inflation.
    Inflation occurred due to the decay of the scalar inflation field. It decayed into other fields and particles. After this expansion, the universe kept expanding but at a much slower rate. The length of inflation can be calculated, but this only tells us how long it should last ON AVERAGE.
    But quantum mechanics means there will be randomness. Inflation could last a bit longer or shorter than expected in different parts of the universe. This is analogous to radioactive decay where half life results in some atoms decaying and others not. We cannot predict which atoms will decay and which will not. Inflation may work similarly.
    Like the concept of half-life, quantum uncertainty may cause, half the volume of the expanded universe to stop inflating after a fraction of a second, but it could continue in the other half of the universe. The part where inflation stopped would be like a bubble universe.
    But space continues expanding exponentially in the other half, and after another fraction of a second, a second bubble universe forms. Steinhardt, Linde and Vilenkin showed that if the if the decay of the inflation field happens slower than the rate of expansion of the universe, then inflation could go on forever, creating more and more bubble universes.
    Unlike radioactive decay, where all the material decays over time because no new material gets created, eternal inflation could go on forever because new space is being created all the time.
    If the theory of eternal inflation is correct, we are inside one of these bubbles. What we think of as the start of the universe may be just the point at which inflation simply ended in our part of the universe. But what the universe is on much larger scales is an unimaginably vast multiverse of universes.
    What is the nature of these other universes? The fundamental laws of quantum mechanics should still apply, since inflation is derived from quantum mechanics. Most physicists think there is probably some universal laws of nature that describes the entirety of the multiverse.
    Are these universes the same as ours? There is nothing in the laws of physics that requires a universe to have the same laws as ours or same fundamental constants as ours.
    We may never be able to directly detect these other universes because the space between them is expanding so fast that no communication at the speed of light could occur. But, wormholes may be able to connect universes. Understanding of high energy physics could give us some clues. Also background gravitational waves may tell us what happened at the beginning of the universe.
    #eternalinflation
    #multiversetheory
    A 2018 paper published posthumously by Steven Hawking and Thomas Hertog alludes to the idea that the background gravitational waves may hold the clues that tell us about whether potential multiverses exist.
  • Наука та технологія

КОМЕНТАРІ • 996

  • @macemoneta
    @macemoneta 2 роки тому +65

    "We are perhaps even more insignificant than we ever imagined"
    I find that strangely comforting.

    • @djayjp
      @djayjp 2 роки тому +7

      Yes indeed, hopefully the rest of the multiverse is better off than us.

    • @MendTheWorld
      @MendTheWorld 2 роки тому +2

      As I commented elsewhere, the “God of the Gaps” becomes inconceivably larger, as we reduce the scope and extent of human cognition…. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing. A little humility goes a long way.

    • @hestiathena4917
      @hestiathena4917 2 роки тому

      I'd find it even more comforting if certain self-centered members of our species could get that thought through their thick skulls.
      More and more, we learn that our little oasis of spacetime is minuscule, finite, fragile, and completely unimportant to anything outside of it. Could we maybe not burn it all up trying to prove who has the bigger d*ck?

    • @maxattack5772
      @maxattack5772 2 роки тому

      because that means we're not lonely? or have a place to move to? lol

    • @djayjp
      @djayjp 2 роки тому +1

      @@MendTheWorld It's still just physics.

  • @GregdeJong
    @GregdeJong 2 роки тому +108

    This kind of video sparks wonder in my mind in a way I recognize from when I was young and first started watching science videos (Sagan, Clarke, others). If adulthood is so often criticized for lacking the imagination and wonder of youth, I for one feel that effect countered when I follow along with newer ideas about origins. Now I can hardly go about my day without perceiving all that I see, as bound energy. Thanks, Arvin!

  • @videoinformer
    @videoinformer 2 роки тому +41

    It is notable that this concept of "multiverse" is completely different from the continuous splitting of reality some have hypothesized takes place as all random possibilities occur in parallel with each other.

    • @felipelopes7976
      @felipelopes7976 2 роки тому

      The continuous spliting of reality will happen again and again because there is an infinite amount of universes due to eternal inflation

    • @marka6487
      @marka6487 Рік тому

      But equally as idiotic.

    • @wmpx34
      @wmpx34 9 місяців тому +5

      Yeah. This one seems more believable somehow, probably because it doesn’t necessitate that there’s a near-infinite number of copies of everything in existence

    • @adamschrepfer1086
      @adamschrepfer1086 27 днів тому +1

      yes thank you for pointing that out.... I have Max Tegmark's book "Our Mathematical Universe" and that point should be made clearer ....I mean it is made but not distinctly enough... There's a quote in that book where Bryce Dewitt is sayin that he doesn't feel like He's being split into multiple versions of "himself" all the time ...and I think it's Hugh Everrett who comes back with the quip, well you don't feel like you are moving at 18.5 miles per second around the sun do you?....anyway it's a crazy concept and fun to imagine

    • @deanschulze3129
      @deanschulze3129 3 дні тому +1

      I believe you are referring to the Many Worlds hypothesis.

  • @johnkotches8320
    @johnkotches8320 2 роки тому +54

    I *think* I understand the topic. The end of inflation, "locally", is the moment our universe's bubble separates from the ongoing expansion to be a discete universe.
    Thank you for touching on the possibility that in these multiverses the local laws of physics could be radically different. Given the isolation of the various universes, it's not something we can know.
    As someone who isn't a theoretical cosmologist/astrophysicist I appreciate your ability to present vastly complicated topics at understandable levels for those of us who haven't made it our life's work.

    • @maxattack5772
      @maxattack5772 2 роки тому

      Exactly what i wanted to say however probably wouldn't be able to express as accurately as you have done, given the fact that im not a native English speaker.

    • @jettmthebluedragon
      @jettmthebluedragon Рік тому +1

      Their is no BUBBLE 😑the only reason why we say their is a bubble is because our telescopes are not powerful enough 😑space and time are infinite but as for the universe as a whole if it had a beginning it will end if the universe as whole had no beginning it won’t end 😑knowing the odds of a planet are 1 and their is only 1 universe the question is in a finite universe the odds increase in a infinite universe the odds decrease 😑

    • @robokill387
      @robokill387 Рік тому +2

      @@jettmthebluedragon No. according to physics, past a certain point, regions of the universe are causally disconnected from our region. It's not a matter of "our telescopes are not powerful enough", it's actually impossible for anything that happens outside a certain volume to have any effect on us, because it's receding away faster that the speed of light, which = the speed of causality. So in a sense they may as well be bubble universes, even though they aren't *literally*.

    • @jettmthebluedragon
      @jettmthebluedragon Рік тому +1

      @@robokill387 ooh really ?😐you say fater then the speed of light not explain why they collide 😐

    • @jettmthebluedragon
      @jettmthebluedragon Рік тому +1

      @@robokill387 also their are no bubble universes pal 😐their is only 1 😑you can’t just be dead and born the next unlike the universe that can 😐I know bubble universes is what you want but that’s false 😑also another thing I know it’s fake that’s Beacuse the laws of physics are set 😐their is no universe what’s the laws are different 😑the element water H20 will always be H20 😑and even so the universe is nothing but made of chemicals 😑and that’s what I don’t think you look deep into 😑even we are made of chemicals the universe is made of chemicals 😐I can make a theory of everything just using atoms and chemistry also I hate to say but the multiverse theory is fake 😑and to prove it 150 killed in South Korea during Halloween how many of them had plans to be moms or dads ?😐and you think their children are just living anyway ?😐sorry pal but that’s fake 😑I hate to say but I say based on the stuff that I’m learning and have learned we live in a determined universe 😐and what that means is a deterministic universe the laws of physics are set in store I know that may seem harsh but the universe does not care 😑I’m sorry but we are not living in a multiverse pal 😑and I have the evidence 😐also just beaacuse you say their should be a multiverse or whatever that does not mean it’s true 😑

  • @rakshitverma5016
    @rakshitverma5016 Рік тому +11

    This is legit the best inflationary multiverse explanation ever. The end of inflation, locally is the thing I was trying to understand and it was conveyed beautifully with the animation you showed ( and also giving analogy to the radioactive decay). Also, the point that the laws of physics can be completely different in all those pocket universe. Thanks for the video man, really appreciate it.

  • @lucidmoses
    @lucidmoses 2 роки тому +19

    Man that is the best multiverse explanation I've seen.

  • @greglinski2208
    @greglinski2208 2 роки тому +9

    When my son was about 11 years old he entered a Jaycee Relay Race. He’d never ran track before and didn’t know everybody wore shorts. He came in jeans, to everyone’s amusement. He ran the last leg for his team - and came away the fastest runner of the day, and made up considerable distance to win. This video made me think of that day. How I wish I had been able to see it, instead of only hear and read about it. I was a single mom and had to work. My son was an amazing athlete. ❤️

  • @NGC-7635
    @NGC-7635 2 роки тому +178

    It's insane to think that even 10 million years from now in a hyper-advanced human civilization, the top scientists may very still have no idea how the universe came into existence.

    • @alwaysdisputin9930
      @alwaysdisputin9930 2 роки тому +55

      Yeah. But at least there is reasonable chance that Cyberpunk will be ready by then.

    • @H1kari_1
      @H1kari_1 2 роки тому +28

      My current guess is that it's just always been there. Instead of "something coming from nothing" it's more like "nothingness can't exist". And the stuff that's always been there keeps morphing and shifting however it may feel like and writing laws of physics as it goes.

    • @bkenglandUTube
      @bkenglandUTube 2 роки тому +7

      10 million years from now, there will still be unanswered questions.

    • @tonysopranooo1
      @tonysopranooo1 2 роки тому +15

      lol humans won't make is another 10,000 years let alone 10 million

    • @JesseGilbride
      @JesseGilbride 2 роки тому +2

      In 10 million years, we'll probably have evolved into something beyond homosapien, possibly more than once.

  • @jareknowak8712
    @jareknowak8712 2 роки тому +11

    Massive amount of other Universes may be the solution to "Fine Tuning" mistery.
    If the number of the Universes, both, those that currently exist, and those that have already disintegrated, was large enough - then there is no "divine plan", only the calculation of the probability, that in the end there was one (Ours) with physical constants arranged in such a way as to favor the long time existence and even the rise of life.
    Just simple process of evolution - many have to die, in order to finally come up with something that has a chance to survive.
    Excuse my English.
    Thank You for the video!

  • @AIbeast382
    @AIbeast382 2 роки тому +26

    And sir can you explain what exactly is energy is it just a number that we found that always remain constant that we derived from mathematical model or is it something more subtle much more deeper then we can imagine

    • @cloudpoint0
      @cloudpoint0 2 роки тому +5

      Energy is just a number, a difference between two states that can lead to equilibrizing action.

    • @enzocussuol
      @enzocussuol 2 роки тому +1

      up

    • @santicruz4012
      @santicruz4012 2 роки тому +1

      Energy is the potential to do work. As long as there is a gradient of stuff, there can be work done

    • @cloudpoint0
      @cloudpoint0 2 роки тому

      @mario kong
      I blocked you since you lack YT etiquette.

    • @Godakuri
      @Godakuri 2 роки тому

      It's best to think of energy as a physical thing. A lot of field theories such as electromagnetism and general relativity use the concept of fields storing energy and momentum. We can further utilize this idea when dealing with capacitors in circuits. I think of energy as a liquid stored inside the object, or field, even though that is definitely 100% wrong. It's a matter of preference, I believe

  • @protoword10
    @protoword10 2 роки тому +2

    You are having great content and explanation of things…
    I always wait for my SS check every second wensday in a month and your channel to post new video! I love it!!! Thank you very, very much!!!

  • @germansanchez5640
    @germansanchez5640 2 роки тому +2

    Thank you for posting -- your voice is extremely clear and enjoyable to hear.!!

  • @okithdesilva129
    @okithdesilva129 2 роки тому +6

    Thank you so much for this video Arvin and this video is so informative

  • @drshajigeorge8815
    @drshajigeorge8815 2 роки тому +3

    Arvin, it's so amazing the way you presented. Always one step ahead!

  • @RPGmodsFan
    @RPGmodsFan 2 роки тому +3

    To me, The Many Worlds Interpretation was always the best explanation. To me, it is the best way to bridge General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics.
    To paraphrase Einstein, I just cannot accept that "God plays dice with the 'universe' ".

  • @TimeCapsuleMan
    @TimeCapsuleMan 2 роки тому +2

    Thanks for another great video, Arvin!

  • @danielm81
    @danielm81 2 роки тому +3

    Great video, as always! Thanks!

  • @DrBrianKeating
    @DrBrianKeating 2 роки тому +4

    Another amazing video!!

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +2

      Glad you enjoyed it!

  • @SuhailSyed_Ibn_Patcha
    @SuhailSyed_Ibn_Patcha 2 роки тому +4

    Hey Arvin, thank you for such an amazing presentation. I always enjoy watching your videos where you make complex science so simple.
    I have a thought, on which I'd like to know what you'd say. When a bubble is formed, it moves apart from one another or the space between them expands making these bubbles move apart. So, is there any chance if at all these bubbles collide with prior bubble or not? Also, if at all these collide, what would be the outcome? Will it cease to exist or could it be, that there can be a possibility for an worm hole to exist.

  • @MasterKoala777
    @MasterKoala777 2 роки тому +7

    If Eternal Inflation is true, and the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is also true, then there would be an infinite number of multiverses, and within each multiverse, there are an infinite number of universes. Mind blown.

  • @ztnee6192
    @ztnee6192 2 роки тому +4

    This video blew my mind, thanks. Everyday something new comes up as very smart people keep looking into the simplest, but deepest questions. Some time ago mankind used to believe Earth was flat... now, we can't even imagine what is beyond our deepest look at the sky.

    • @OldSch00l71
      @OldSch00l71 2 роки тому

      Some believed, many didnt. arguments for the earth being round goes away back to antiquity.

  • @jabout6366
    @jabout6366 2 роки тому +3

    You communicate this stuff so clearly, thank you.

  • @bentationfunkiloglio
    @bentationfunkiloglio 2 роки тому +2

    Each time a new video drops, it's like Christmas morning. Such a joy to watch!

  • @mikaljan
    @mikaljan 2 роки тому +1

    great video like always! loved it!!!

  • @Andospar
    @Andospar 2 роки тому +3

    I really loved this video. I want to thank you for your inspirational videos. Not that it is your fault, but I see your perspectives more clearly when I view us/matter sinking into space which in turn creates space which affects all matter, from the direction and speed of a pitcher's curveball, to the insulating characteristics of earth to the cold of space, including the expansion of the universe. It is easier for me to envision our physical matter universe, the way you explain it, when I see space created additionally to the expansion of the universe. Like digging a whole in space and magnifying time dilation. Again, thank you for your time and efforts.

  • @neil6477
    @neil6477 2 роки тому +7

    I think this is a truly beautiful concept - and one which is very well explained - thank you Arvin. It seems to me that, in a way, we have now combined the old 'solid state' theory of our universe with the 'big bang' theory. Brilliant!

    • @GeneoftheWorld
      @GeneoftheWorld Рік тому

      Its just math and really really tiny and really really large numbers that you worship. That and clever wording and artist concepts. Cosmology is fine, because we can measure, this has no measurement nor rooting in anything. No longer science but philosophy.

    • @neil6477
      @neil6477 Рік тому

      @@GeneoftheWorld So?

  • @AndreaZzzXXX
    @AndreaZzzXXX 2 роки тому +2

    I found your channel and your work is great, you got a new subscriber from Italy.
    Ps: thank you for the english subtitles, is a great help for 'not mother tongue' like me, grazie !

  • @diegonogueira8222
    @diegonogueira8222 2 роки тому +1

    Amazing. I saw a excelent vídeo from PBS spacetime about this subject, but I confess that it be a little abstract to me and i could not understand very well. But you did it. Now, i could understand much more. For sure, when i watch that vídeo again, I will understand much more. Thank you!

  • @aether_
    @aether_ 2 роки тому +5

    I listen to a lot of science communicators. You and Sean Carrol are by far the best. Thanks for the awesome content!

  • @xxSgt_Aryes
    @xxSgt_Aryes 2 роки тому +3

    Can you please do a video regarding the “Great Attractor” I heard about it somewhere and wonder how it all plays a role in this expansion, hurts my brain!!

  • @spyofborg
    @spyofborg 2 роки тому +1

    Very nice video, is the first time I read about this theory on how multiverses could be real.
    Like I said on the previous video, I first had a feeling my might like the idea of a multiverse because of saying, a universe has no edge.
    This video actually can show a universe bubble actually might have an edge and yes, even a center.
    Look at 7:47 in the video.
    We have many bubbles, but each bubble has a clear edge of THAT bubble, not of the space itself. Space itself that expand faster than the speed of light is fine. So the fabric of space itself might not have an edge, again, extremely hard to proof or disprove, bubbles within the space, the universe should in this case have an edge.
    It is just so complex so mindblowing, and the fun part is, we could have it ALL wrong also, haha. :)
    What is actually the most mindblowing is how huge the multiverse can be.
    Keep on working on those videos, Arvin, they are great to think and pounder on.

  • @leisuretime9177
    @leisuretime9177 2 роки тому +1

    Another great video Arvin

  • @michaelblacktree
    @michaelblacktree 2 роки тому +3

    This explanation of the multiverse just "clicked" in my head. Thanks for the video!

  • @-Neutron-Star
    @-Neutron-Star 2 роки тому +8

    In high school i have done ample half-life calculations, but with out ever wondering which “half” is decaying! I wish I had asked my teacher that question. Thanks Arvin for introducing me to quantum-uncertainty!

  • @israelquito3072
    @israelquito3072 2 роки тому +1

    AMMAZING VIDEO ASH!!👍👍👍👍

  • @mrsherlock4182
    @mrsherlock4182 2 роки тому +1

    Keep Up the good Work Arvin💪

  • @HypotheticalZ
    @HypotheticalZ 2 роки тому +8

    Man keep up the good work ❤️
    Nothing thrills me more than physics but situation have made me to go for engineering! However right after my graduation I got into an accident and been partially disabled since then. And your videos are the only thing that still spark my soul ❤️❤️
    thanks 🙏

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +4

      Welcome to the club. Economics made me go into engineering as well, but physics was my first love.

    • @MendTheWorld
      @MendTheWorld 2 роки тому +1

      @@ArvinAsh Engineering made me go into geology. 😆.
      To each his own path! 😉

  • @TheSeiris
    @TheSeiris 2 роки тому +3

    Hey! I bet you are the best explainer in science category. Thank you for the great works!
    May I suggest some video ideas?

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +1

      Of course, anytime.

  • @ccaeser
    @ccaeser 2 роки тому +1

    Excellent video! Thank you.

  • @jackburton8352
    @jackburton8352 2 роки тому +2

    Thanks Arvin great video

  • @esra_erimez
    @esra_erimez 2 роки тому +4

    This video is more significant than we ever imagined

  • @meows_and_woof
    @meows_and_woof 2 роки тому +4

    It’s so mind blowing it’s difficult to wrap your head around. If there are multiple universes then those universes must be in some kind of common space bubble themselves what would that space called? Is it possible that there is more beyond that as well? Where does it end? Is it possible that those bubble universes are part of some bigger structure which we can’t even comprehend as yet?

  • @tomasprochazka1437
    @tomasprochazka1437 Рік тому +1

    I never thought about this. Very interesting, thank you

  • @MzzBlacknBeautiful
    @MzzBlacknBeautiful 2 роки тому +1

    This was really deep and informative 👍🏾👍🏾

  • @charliemeyer6475
    @charliemeyer6475 2 роки тому +53

    Looks good Arvin. Got me thinking, if the fundamental constant of light speed is allowed to vary between inflation collapsed universes, would they inevitably overtake or overlap each other?

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +51

      Do you mean if speed of light is different in the space between universe, then could we detect them? Unlikely since the speed of light would not change in our universe, but I will add the caveat that we would need to understand the overarching laws of physics that is constant in the multiverse. It is possible that there is some loophole there that allows this kind of communication. Or, as I pointed out in the video, Wormholes may be able to connect two different universes - but again, this is a stretch is unlikely to be realistic.

    • @Universko
      @Universko 2 роки тому +6

      @@ArvinAsh I think the gravity is the clue for all the mysterious of the universe

    • @Thezombiekiller06
      @Thezombiekiller06 2 роки тому +6

      If you go faster than the speed of light (at least in our universe), then you will go backwards in time. Let's hope that it's not the case for the other universes

    • @charliemeyer6475
      @charliemeyer6475 2 роки тому +7

      I meant if "c" varied by universe, and it is faster than inflation speed in one of them, could that one overtake and envelope other universes with slower than inflation c constant?

    • @christianheichel
      @christianheichel 2 роки тому

      @@Thezombiekiller06 you get that inside event horizons. Might there be universes inside event horizons/black holes?

  • @sonjailic8847
    @sonjailic8847 2 роки тому +6

    If we cannot glean information from outside of the observable universe, how did we determine or reach the idea that this is the average inflation rate (and therefore leading to the idea of multiple universes)

    • @michaelfried3123
      @michaelfried3123 2 роки тому

      Arvin has entered the realm of philosophical rubbish if you ask me...

    • @10-AMPM-01
      @10-AMPM-01 2 роки тому

      By looking at the expansion rates of objects we can observe, and extrapolating that to assume other parts of the universe we observe, likely behave the same way. Light, or electromagnetic energy, is our central medium of existence. There could be places between universes, where electromagnetism is limited. Gravity causes such an effect, and lenses light around massive stellar objects.
      To consider the influence of dark matter, the mysterious gravitational pull from unseen matter, this is a possible explanation.

  • @johnwelbourn3811
    @johnwelbourn3811 2 роки тому +2

    Great video Arvin, does that mean there may be other bubble universes that permit the existence of monopoles? And the thing that always gets me with constant creation theories is where does all the energy come from?

  • @thomasasthma9953
    @thomasasthma9953 2 роки тому +1

    very interesting, arvin

  • @mkjaiswal11
    @mkjaiswal11 2 роки тому +5

    If the Inflation stopped at different places at different times, creating many such bubble universes, can 2 or more bubble universes form so close that they collide ? The consequences will be really interesting (possibly dangerous too)

    • @ianmathwiz7
      @ianmathwiz7 9 місяців тому +1

      The answer to that is yes. It's possible for two universes to form so close (and the distance between them would have to be microscopic) that they collide. There are a few patterns in the cosmic background radiation that might be the result of a collision, but they're currently only at about a 95% statistical significance, which is not high enough for a new discovery in cosmology.

  • @kaue_nogueira
    @kaue_nogueira 2 роки тому +3

    This timeline from copernico until today was awesome!

  • @faridehamjadi5289
    @faridehamjadi5289 2 роки тому +1

    beautiful explanation, thank you

  • @rogelv8td
    @rogelv8td 2 роки тому +2

    I love your videos in general, but my favorites are the ones describing quantum mechanics. Could it be possible that you do a video describing electron dynamics of third generation solar cells vs first generation, and another comparing electron dynamics of lithium ion batteries to solid state batteries
    Thanks for your videos

  • @TheCynicalPhilosopher
    @TheCynicalPhilosopher 2 роки тому +9

    I have always heard that particle colliders can reproduce the energy levels of the very early universe. How can this be if *all of the energy* was in a small space in the early universe? How can just a fraction of the energy in our particle colliders come anywhere near that much energy?
    For instance, a Google search says that there is 10^53 kg of mass in the observable universe. To get energy I multiply by c^2 which gives me 3x10^61 Joules, which then converted to eV is 1.9x10^80 eV.
    But in the video at 11:33 it says the energy at the Big Bang is 10^24 eV.
    Are my calculations incorrect?
    Edit: it occurs to me, too, that the number should be even larger than what I calculated since not all the energy at the big bang would be in the form of mass.

    • @davidburke4101
      @davidburke4101 2 роки тому +4

      Average energy over a given area, not the total energy

    • @bolt6308
      @bolt6308 2 роки тому

      Yes calculations are incorrect try using a formula to make you understand

  • @AutisticThinker
    @AutisticThinker 2 роки тому +3

    Makes sense space is infinite... Dark energy is perhaps thermodynamic, everything is just cooling off to reach an equilibrium.

  • @mrmonk7197
    @mrmonk7197 2 роки тому +1

    Enjoyed that. Be well.

  • @robertpupo
    @robertpupo 2 роки тому +2

    Brilliant - 20 min narrative summarising hours of lectures on the subject

  • @NVidea-yz1fg
    @NVidea-yz1fg 2 роки тому +4

    What causes the bubble to stop to rapidly inflate and to just expand? Could that be gravity? What I am thinking is, when the bubble appears as a single point in the inflating "multiverse inflation field", maybe it just keeps inflating _with_ it. Until something happens, i.e. gravity emerges - which then slows down the inflation. Similar to how gravity keeps galaxies together while the universe still expands.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +2

      The standard theory (simplified greatly) says that the inflation field was in a false vacuum at very high temperatures. It quantum tunneled to the true vacuum. This released the energy in the field and resulted in inflation.

  • @lifeinaraindrop108
    @lifeinaraindrop108 2 роки тому +4

    Thanks for such a nice video. But I have one fundamental question. We say there might be multiverses in empty space. But what about the space, is it infinite? Does this empty void used to exist as it is forever? Can we say that space is just as it is nothing can define its existence? I hope you can also make one video about this metaphysical question.

    • @harrkev
      @harrkev 2 роки тому +4

      Cosmologists love infinities. So, if the multiverse exists, then there logically must have been an infinite number of them in the past, and an infinite number of them in the future. Given that it is expanding very, very fast, and started an infinite amount of time ago, then these infinities are the only option. If you exclude a creator, then you exclude a first cause, so everything pretty much has to go on forever, leading to infinite everything.
      But don't worry. The odds are that you are a Boltzman brain, and will be dead in a few seconds. Look it up. It makes NO sense, but logically must be true given that everything is infinite.

  • @manjunathgangadhargangadha4364
    @manjunathgangadhargangadha4364 2 роки тому +1

    I thought this channel got closed... Did not received notification from youtube for past 2months... Good to see your channel still on 🙏

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +1

      Others have said the same thing. Not sure why you're not receiving notifications.

  • @ccaeser
    @ccaeser 2 роки тому +2

    A beautiful illustration of multiuniverse can be see in the last scene of the movie "Men in Black I". Fascinating indeed.

  • @SocratesAlexander
    @SocratesAlexander 2 роки тому +6

    Can it be possible that inflation is 'the' mechanism that produces the locality principle? I mean, before inflation, every point in the space was connected, hence they were close to each other. When the localization process started, many of those links broke so that only the local links survived, hence the universe seemed like it was inflated. This explains the source of energy for inflation, too.

    • @michaelfried3123
      @michaelfried3123 2 роки тому

      Arvin has gone over to the philosophical rubbish camp now...sad.

    • @SocratesAlexander
      @SocratesAlexander 2 роки тому

      @@michaelfried3123 No sir, its not rubbish. It is a new theory. Let me give you a link: ua-cam.com/video/IC1mvWOZUBE/v-deo.html or you can search for George Musser....

  • @abhijitdey1320
    @abhijitdey1320 2 роки тому +3

    In the end, we'll never know!

  • @markhousman8447
    @markhousman8447 2 роки тому +1

    Great video.

  • @Bestape
    @Bestape 2 роки тому

    This decay idea is fun. Thank you!!

  • @rossk7927
    @rossk7927 2 роки тому +3

    Wow. That theory has a lot going for it and patches a lot of holes in BBT. My immediate first question is then: how does this relate to the condensation of matter - does this also explain that? Does the energy come from the "freezing" of the inflation field? As in, the energy which was powering the expansion gets dumped into our spacetime as that expansion halted locally - like how slamming the breaks on a vehicle transforms the kinetic energy into heat and other forms. Or are there other candidates for that energy from somewhere else?

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +1

      Good question. The first video explains that better here: ua-cam.com/video/q5dy-NtVeF0/v-deo.html

    • @michaelfried3123
      @michaelfried3123 2 роки тому

      @@ArvinAsh philosophical rubbish. let's get back to real science please...

    • @MendTheWorld
      @MendTheWorld 2 роки тому

      @@michaelfried3123 I’m inclined to agree, but I wouldn’t put it in such harsh terms. I’m still trying to understand the connection (if there is one) between this concept and the ontological domain of science.
      As Brian Greene has observed, our brains evolved within the bubble of our universe, and even our greatest minds cannot comprehend quantum mechanics.

    • @michaelfried3123
      @michaelfried3123 2 роки тому

      @@MendTheWorld I don't think I was harsh.

    • @yziib3578
      @yziib3578 2 роки тому

      @@michaelfried3123 science is a philosophy. So I don't understand what is your point. I guess you could present an argument, instead of only making a statement. But do you have a good enough understanding of science and philosophy to do this.

  • @martifingers
    @martifingers 2 роки тому +5

    This is of the usual brilliant standard of this channel. I have two very naive questions. One is what determines the point at which one "universe" becomes separare from another. Iget that the space is expanding but is there some "frontier" at some point? (I did say these questions were simple!)
    Secondly is there still room for the Everett many worlds interpretation of QM, within each universe? Worlds within worlds eh?

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +5

      Thank you. Great questions! Like radio active decay, where the bubbles form would be completely random. We wouldn't be able to predict it in advance. Yes, Everett interpretation could still hold. And indeed they would be worlds within worlds as you pointed out. Sounds crazy, but that's what the equations seem to be telling us!

    • @garyphillips4210
      @garyphillips4210 2 роки тому

      I think that theoretical physicists say that there are about 5 different types of Parallel Universes. One type proposed by Hugh Everett is Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. If not true scientifically, I believe it to be true philosophically or de facto. What interests me and many others is, is this Universe infinite? I would say yes. that beyond Our Observable Universe , the Universe probably goes on infinitely. As a Thought Experiment ask yourself: If you could be located at our 'present Edge of the Universe' what would you see? I think you would see another Observable Universe very similar to what we see from here!

    • @martifingers
      @martifingers 2 роки тому

      @@ArvinAsh Thanks Arvin. I suppose I was really asking about what happens after they form ie given they are separate in space at what point doers one universe "blend into" the other if you see what I mean. Or perhaps that is a meaningless question as there can be no communication between universes because of the speed of light limitation?

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому

      @@martifingers There is no blending. Each is isolated from another. However, they probably would share some of the same overarching laws of physics.

  • @flaviusnita6008
    @flaviusnita6008 2 роки тому

    Thank You, very common mode explained!

  • @richardsylvanus2717
    @richardsylvanus2717 2 роки тому +1

    Good stuff

  • @solomonlalani
    @solomonlalani 2 роки тому +3

    Once again, an absolute wonder to gain knowledge via Arvin!
    Question, Arvin: if space is expanding faster than the light, does it mean speed of light is not the speed limit of the Universe? Wouldn't this--I don't know if it's fact or theory--may change many assumptions we now have even towards Quantum Theory itself!

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +1

      Speed of light is the upper limit WITHIN spacetime, but it is not the maximum limit of the universe or the multiverse.

    • @MendTheWorld
      @MendTheWorld 2 роки тому

      @@ArvinAsh Am I to understand that this concept has a connection to science? It doesn’t seem that way to me, assuming science is constrained by what is observable, measurable, demonstrable, and verifiable. I’m not trying to be difficult. Just trying to reasonably constrain the ontological domain of science.

  • @axetroll
    @axetroll 2 роки тому +3

    If 9:10 happen around two bubbles, with enough time 7:25 will happen also since inflation has stopped. Is that right? Great video!

  • @ChessQuickies
    @ChessQuickies 2 роки тому +2

    Hi Arvin. Greatly appreciated work and effort
    I would really like it if you made a video about solving the bohr atomic radii
    Thanks!

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому

      I think you mean this video? ua-cam.com/video/fP2TAw7NnVU/v-deo.html

  • @abdussalamadnan7133
    @abdussalamadnan7133 2 роки тому +1

    Arvin You are So Cool and these contents are well Organized ,Thank you for generating sparks in this curious Mind 💖 🔥

  • @miranmartincic7712
    @miranmartincic7712 2 роки тому +8

    Great way of explaining what I have tried to understand for the last few years. You know, instead of "What is north of the North Pole" and so on. I really enjoy watching and learning, keep it going Mr. Ash! Great stuff!

  • @GEMINDIGO
    @GEMINDIGO Рік тому +3

    Of course there was no beginning and there will never be an end...

  • @drefrazier4266
    @drefrazier4266 2 роки тому +2

    So the universe was born, exponentially expanded, slowed down, then sped up again? And considering the enormous amount of time it has to continue accelerating, won't it eventually reach that initial speed?

  • @gcoffey223
    @gcoffey223 2 роки тому +1

    I thank you very much for your work

  • @meneeRubieko
    @meneeRubieko 2 роки тому +6

    Very interesting concept. I’m just wondering, does the creation of these bubbles cost any energy in a way? Or does the energy in those bubble universes come from pure energy ultimately from the ‘first’ big bang? In that case, wouldn’t the total amount of energy be drained by the creation of the bubble universes and eventually run out? So not infinite universes right?

    • @enlilannunaki9064
      @enlilannunaki9064 2 роки тому +10

      The total net energy for the universe is zero. The “negative” energy of gravity exactly offsets the other positive energies (mass and energy). Creating a new universe therefore doesn’t cost any energy. Alan Guth referred to it as the “ultimate free lunch.”

    • @333STONE
      @333STONE 2 роки тому

      Very awesome to see this comment. Thank you 🙂

    • @333STONE
      @333STONE 2 роки тому +1

      @@enlilannunaki9064 Hey, is that you? Jk.. nice comment Love the name.. En Lil=In air,
      Annunaki Anu=skyfather na=on Ki=Earth

    • @akostarkanyi825
      @akostarkanyi825 2 роки тому +2

      ​@@enlilannunaki9064 Gravity could not exist in the early universe as mas could not exist, either. Matter has mass - but matter means structured and condensed energy. It cannot exist over certain limits of temperature. And the temperature of the early Universe just after the Big Bang was above that limit. So one cannot speak about negative energy (the existence of which is only a theory not a fact, by the way) when there is no matter and then there is no mass, either.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +7

      Enlil below has an interesting point, but the "free lunch" idea although I like it myself, is not necessarily true. It is not accepted by all physicists. But Energy conservation, on a untiversal and multiverse scale may not actually be conserved. I will have a video on that in the near future.

  • @David-di5bo
    @David-di5bo 2 роки тому +4

    Great video! As a fellow lover of big questions, multiverse is as "big" as it gets.

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому

      Indeed!

    • @edwardwood3622
      @edwardwood3622 2 роки тому

      Maybe,

    • @alwaysdisputin9930
      @alwaysdisputin9930 2 роки тому

      @David - please, where did you get the 'I Stand With UKRAINE' badge thing? I try to debate the Russian propaganda trolls & would like 1 myself

    • @David-di5bo
      @David-di5bo 2 роки тому +1

      @@alwaysdisputin9930 Hi, I just found it with a Google Image search and took a screenshot.

    • @alwaysdisputin9930
      @alwaysdisputin9930 2 роки тому

      @@David-di5bo Thanks. Glory to Ukraine!

  • @stabilini
    @stabilini 2 роки тому +1

    Mindblowing. Thanks.

  • @kabivose
    @kabivose 2 роки тому +2

    How do we know that the expansion was exponential? All the models I've seen don't seem to be exponential but could possibly be logarithmic.
    As it seems the expansion stopped being exponential at some point, so during exponential expansion what was the doubling time? And when did it stop? Or are we in a period of exponential expansion with a very large doubling time?

  • @korakys
    @korakys 2 роки тому +3

    Seems pretty unlikely. I'm doubtful inflation even existed in the first place though.

    • @ny3793
      @ny3793 2 роки тому +2

      Scientific consensus says it’s correct

    • @korakys
      @korakys 2 роки тому

      @@ny3793 I'm aware of that. The consensus opinion isn't always the correct one in the end. I'm not saying it's definitely wrong though, just that I'd bet a small amount of money that it is.

  • @the_real_dubb
    @the_real_dubb 2 роки тому +4

    "Time" starts at the beginning of the Big Bang, so when we ask what happened "before" the Big Bang, it also begs the question (from me).... is there more than one dimension of time?

    • @Darko807
      @Darko807 2 роки тому

      Interesting. Well we have 3 dimensions of space and when we try to picture time we alls draw an arrow from a to b but what if time had more arrows with different concepts as the time we experience

    • @cloudpoint0
      @cloudpoint0 2 роки тому +1

      The Big Bang is just an arbitrary point from which we measure time since General Relativity can't explain time before the Big Bang, though it surely existed before in an eternal multiverse.

    • @harrkev
      @harrkev 2 роки тому +1

      @@cloudpoint0 People keep acting like the eternal multiverse is actually a thing. If it is real, then we need proof. Otherwise, it is more a a religion or philosophy than science.

    • @cloudpoint0
      @cloudpoint0 2 роки тому

      @@harrkev
      I don't think it is real but theories start with speculation. And the speculation answers questions that other theories can't answer.

  • @sony5244
    @sony5244 2 роки тому +2

    "The more insignificant that we ever imagine " Wow.

  • @bombdottcom111
    @bombdottcom111 2 роки тому +1

    This is a fantastic video as always (;

  • @monstrositylabs
    @monstrositylabs 2 роки тому +3

    I think you meant to title that "The multiverse HAS to be real"

    • @ArvinAsh
      @ArvinAsh  2 роки тому +3

      Well, everything in science is always under scrutiny, so I nor anyone else should make that kind of absolute declaration. But I get what you mean.

    • @monstrositylabs
      @monstrositylabs 2 роки тому

      @@ArvinAsh It's just that it seems the odds are stacked in favour of there being a multiverse. Any other conclusion is too much of a coincidence IMO.

  • @RoyalCenter-Samary
    @RoyalCenter-Samary 2 роки тому +1

    Thank you very much. It was one of the best videos I've ever seen.🙏

  • @BrianSu
    @BrianSu 2 роки тому +1

    Best ever video on this subject!

  • @ministerofjoy
    @ministerofjoy 2 роки тому +1

    Thank you.

  • @zobby364
    @zobby364 21 день тому

    this was a good video bro

  • @jacquescouet9262
    @jacquescouet9262 2 роки тому +1

    Excellent!!!.

  • @krishnabhutada3983
    @krishnabhutada3983 2 роки тому +1

    Have learned a thing today!

  • @deeperblueofficial
    @deeperblueofficial 2 роки тому +2

    Exactly how I've been picturing reality. Thanks.

  • @okithdesilva129
    @okithdesilva129 2 роки тому +2

    Arvin I'm waiting for the video about ion thrusters

  • @romeowcat
    @romeowcat 11 місяців тому

    We found the Gravitational Waves a few days ago. It turns out our equipment was more than sensitive enough, it's just that time moved 5x slower in the early Universe and when the Universe began accelerating to our speed of time, it stretched the waves like a giant slinky but once we made the adjustments it was easy. We discovered it because we noticed Quasars closer to the early Universe pulsed 5x slower than the Quasars closer to us and since time is relative and the speed of light isn't, it had to be gravity.

  • @dray7579
    @dray7579 2 роки тому +1

    This stuff is fascinating 🤯

  • @skipperofschool8325
    @skipperofschool8325 2 роки тому +1

    Good video

  • @deanpluber
    @deanpluber 5 місяців тому +1

    AMAZING!

  • @ferencszabo3504
    @ferencszabo3504 2 роки тому +1

    Wow the best hypothesis ever on this theme!

  • @brijmohan1492
    @brijmohan1492 2 роки тому +2

    How awesome is this video ❤️

  • @randalljsilva
    @randalljsilva 2 роки тому +2

    The Inflation theory was created to explain the smoothness of the energy distribution we see in the universe, but why would we expect the universe before inflation to be unevenly distributed? It seems just as likely that the universe could have started out very smooth and therefore not need inflation.