I used to calmly watch TV series with beer like any usual retiree . Instead now I study the school curriculum in physics and English. And I'm not sure I'm right, unlike my wife.
Dr Krauss it is OUR privilege and OUR honour to have a world leading physicist to show and teach us . Greetings and respect from Greece. It would be amazing if you continued making videos. Thanks in advance. Michael K. Athens region.
I listen to the AAI 2009 lecture every week with my young son. He's gained a great appreciation for how amazing cosmology can be. You should definitely be doing more of these.
The variety of people you connect with these ingredients of reality, will do nothing but help in this moment in time. I appreciate the time you take for this.
I have gained an understanding of the universe from Prof Lawrence Krauss. He is an amazing teacher, and I’m so thankful to the Prof, for his amazing passion and commitment. Thank you Lawrence Krauss. I was once a believer in 1 intelligent designer, but Lawrence has presented factual evidence and very plausible theories to the religious “cop out” answer.....”Well God made this happen”
The big whimper, cold, dark and empty! I loved the swimmer analogy it really put it into perspective for me. I hope you can find the time to do more 5minphysic videos in the future as we all sure do love them. Thanks so much, Lawrence!
Dr Lawrence thank you very much for your videos, specially those wich people like me without a scientific training can understand and get fascinated by, and are able to answer the type of questions that we answer so often at the air (at least me).
This is what I love about science, cosmology and physics, always questions to be answered. And even though we may never find out all the answers but ha!, what a fantastic time to be alive and listen to scientist like yourself who are constantly searching for those answers. Thank you so much for another really interesting video. Take care.
In 1977, as a junior in high school. I asked my science teacher, Jerry Palmounter, how is it possible for galaxies to move away from one another at a velocity greater than the speed of light....he was unable to answer the question. I’ll never forget that
I have a challenge for you Lawrence. One rule though; this challenge is outside of a religion debate. It is meant to be a scientific question with no religious or supernatural underpinnings. Here it is: The big bang is understood because at a point in time scientists from Bell labs (I believe) accidentally detected the remnants ( or the afterglow?) of its expansion. But imagine that not being the case, to the extent that time lapse eventually made that detection inaccessible forever. In other words, we would go on perhaps thinking that the universe did not necessarily come from a single point in the form of a Big Bang. What does this say about science? Does it not suggest that it’s ability where understanding the origin of the universe is concerned could have completely negated if not but for an incidental observation that occurred quite by accident and, had it not occurred would have rendered us blind to the origin of the universe. And, if that is so, does it not worry you about the reliability of science to explain all? By the way, keep up the good work. I think this is your calling; not the religious debates
Interesting stuff! It's funny, I often hear about how physicists and cosmologist are constantly allegedly "overreaching" about their certainty with regard to these big questions about the universe. It certainly doesn't sound that way to me, and this video is a good illustration of that. In fact, it's usually those people making that accusation who have overreaching certainties.
Love your videos Lawrence! If you're considering making another one I would love to hear about Cyclic Conformal Cosmology developed my Penrose. A cyclic cycle of eons and big bangs, any opinions?
I find it fascinating and proud of scientific thought, even if it all ends in a cold, dark puff. Great Stuff. Thanks for the series. PS. I am holding out for 10 google years to see if empty space really is actually hot and bubbly and we start again
Glad to see that 5minphysics is back. Can you please do 5min about one of these two 1. Quantum theory; or 2. General relativity. I saw some videos about quantum and general relativity, and read some, but no one can explain physics as well as you. Thanks.
I hope you see my comment Professor Krauss. I thought you've said that space is in fact not empty. That virtual particles pop in and out of existence. Now, you say that the future of space will be cold dark and empty. Can you clarify this for me please? Thanks in advance.
Be happy you are living now; maybe in the far future you have to look for another job! EXCELLENT WORK, I follow most of your lectures and read your books. Thanks
Hey Krauss! I have a question that I have been wondering about. I have been watching a lot of your videos, and I find it so interesting and mind blowing. I was recently watching a debate video from 2013 with you. "Lawrence Krauss vs Hamza Tzortzis - Islam vs Atheism Debate" In this debate you argued that infinity is possible, due to mathematical reasoning. That in math, infinity is the idea that something has no endpoint and goes on forever. But even though that is correct, the same logic can be used when you are moving an object closer and closer to a wall. According to the Mathematics the object should never reach the wall, yet it does. So if that is the case, wouldn't that make the argument weak in a sense? What I said probably made no sense. I am terrible in Math and Physics, and I have no idea what I'm talking about. But I still find these questions about the universe so exciting, and I was hoping if you could respond to my question :)
The CMB was predicted before it was actually discovered -- are there any thoughts as to what *else* might have been out there that we can no longer see due to the expansion? Or would anything like that have been obfuscated by the CMB anyway?
Professor Krauss can you tell us when do the stars which are newly formed exactly start to revolve around the galactic center ..I mean do they start to revolve when the planets are forming or does it wait for like a billion years and then start to revolve around it's galaxy
Hello Professor Krauss. Great to see you around again. I assume you meant 10 billion years in the future we only see local group? Because the universe isn't older than 10 trillion. Having said that my knowledge based purely on listening to people like you. I have studied maths and avoided science subjects because I was afraid they might lead to a job!
@@lkrauss1 Thank you. I misunderstood because I thought you said it would be less than current existance. It was 3am here and 3rd day returning to teaching post quarantine!! (Melbourne) Ps. Your chat with Chompsky was very inspiring while going back to uni for masters of teaching.
Consider the following: Theists, eg William Lane Craig, "use" Lambda-CDM model to suggest ex nihilo creation, claiming that an "actual infinite" cannot exist. However, if we assume the model holds and something doesn't disrupt expansion, the same model posits an infinite future. So the Theist then appears to me to be claiming, without evidence, that an infinite past is absurd but an infinite future is to be expected.
What came first, radiation or carbon? Is the ‘stuff’ which makes up black holes and dark energy, in its own type of ‘time existence’ and simply behaves too fast for our scientific abilities to observe?
What about bodies that don't end up in this ginormous black hole, would they continue to exist in a "empty" universe or could they decay somehow? What happens to time in a "massless" universe?
Please explains more on why the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, the evidence of big bang will dissappear because it wont be able to permiate the galaxy. The are under served appetite for this stuff and you are blessed with knowledge on these. Kindly explain on it
@@lkrauss1 thank you for this. And I got a request. Kindly make more videos on these because people highly prefer to watch informative videos rather than reading books. The way you explain makes it remarkably easy to grasp the concept and understand it. Thank you again for everything you do in educating the Public. You are a true blessing to the modern society, professor Krauss.
Can i ask you a question, professor? Imagine a photon moving in the vacuum. Its wave function spreading for miles. Then it interacts with an atom, collapses and gets absorved. The collapse of that entire miles long wave its going to happen instantly, with no respect to speed of light? Its strange the idea of light moving faster than light.
Can I ask a philosophical question : In 10trillion years, as the only stars in the universe are the milky way, if someone says that in ancient books they talked about mysterious creation, galaxies and much more than what we have and can measure, they would be considered lying and dumb, but are they? To expand, what is truth? Is it what we can only measure and test, or it can be more than that?
Whaaw love it seeying you lecture so intimatly proffesor 👍🏻.. One question is it a green screen ? Or are you realy living in such a beautifull natural 'universe' 😉 Grtzz johny geerts
@@lkrauss1 Non sequitur! Lawrence, the mass of the neutrino is irrefutable proof that we live in a holodeck scenario. You have to agree! It's irrefutable!
@@lkrauss1 You would be very welcome here man ,Oh yeah . If you do visit I really want to meet ya ,I have spoke to other folks who talk in public and I found they talk a lot more when its one on one .I guess I think I am ready for the truth hehehehe
@@thenotchosen have had 3 wonderful visits to Ireland, giving lectures and hosting films, both in Ireland and Northern Ireland. Would always be happy to return for the right event.
If a casting director ever needed an archetypical professorial icon for a movie role, look no further! Vest, receding hairline, facial hair, round glasses. Checks all the boxes AND the real deal! 🤯
Professor Krauss, I got a question. If dark energy is every where and it is the cause for the Universe to expand rigorously and separate galaxies apart, why isn't it tearing the solar system and seperating the planets and Sun. Is the Sun's gravitational pull so much stronger than the dark energy that is easily capable of seperating humongous galaxies apart?
I have a stupid question for ya, but I've asked a few people this question before and nobody could give me an answer. If space is expanding and (some) planets are moving away from each other faster than the speed of light and if you was standing on one of the planets and had a rope tied to yourself and the other end tied onto another planet that was moving away faster than the speed of light, would you be pulled away faster than light? I realise the feasibility of actually doing this would be.. unrealistic but just as a thought experiment. Which also brings about another question, if two planets are tied together by a rope and they are expanding away from each other, what happens? The rope breaks? The rope increases in length?
I'm a bit confused about how the oldest stars being 10 trillion years old when the big bang happened "just" 13.8 billion years ago. Is it a slip of the tongue or are there stars that predates the big bang?
@@lkrauss1 Thanks for giving your attention ! Scientifically yes but Idea is the base of further studies as Einstein defines Science. I was surprised to read the universe without a Creator, expanding and contracting universe and the concept of Space time and Earth time relatively in Buddhist Sutras! What did ancient Mesopotamians and Egyptians or people from other civilizations think must be interesting!
Hi Dr. Krauss. I’m a big fan of your work. If you don’t mind me asking, why are you an anti theist? I saw your talk about religion being outdated. Lol. I personally don’t have any problem with religion and was just curious as to why you’re anti religious. Thank you so much.
Lawrence (with all due respect), you're talking about the simulation that our 'universe' is based on. We don't live on an actual planet moving through space in a vast universe. We live in a hyper-realistic holodeck scenario that is based on a concurrently running simulation which is based on an organic scenario. We actually live in the best possible scenario (when you think about it) because we can keep refreshing our sun every six billion years for instance and therefore live here forever in the holodeck. And I can prove it..
@@TheMysticAxiom I wish I was too. We live inside a large holodeck complex super-structure probably not much bigger than the planet Jupiter. I've written a book about it called Our Holodeck Heaven.
@@TheMysticAxiom I have a question for you. If my theory is correct and we do indeed live inside a hyper-realistic holodeck complex super-structure, do you think you could handle it.. I'm not sure if you could. I'm not sure most people could. Even though the 'world' we have been living in all along is wrong, corrupt and run by psychopaths and quite frankly 'almost anything would be better' you would still prefer it because your psyche simply can't handle major change. Are you red pill or blue pill.. Most people would like to believe that they are red pill but in reality they would prefer the comfortable lie to the uncomfortable truth when it comes right down to it.
eventually it will orbit the earth at a larger distance, and the earth's rotation will synch to the moons orbit so the earth day will be about 40 days long.
As far as I remember, there isn't enough time until the sun dies for the moon-Earth system to come to equilibrium. The recession of the moon is slowing down, and it will eventually stop moving away from the Earth. I assume this is because the moon "steals" energy from the rotation of the Earth using the tides, but the growing distance causes this effect to diminish more and more. But long before the Earth becomes tidally locked to the Moon, the sun will already have died.
The fact that there are stars whose lifetimes are longer than 10 trillion years, does it mean that there could be more elements in their cores that we don't know of? And apart from the cores, were some elements created in any other manner? I know about the man-made ones
@@lkrauss1 Could you do a video or share on your social media, repositories of information about astronomy, for people who are interested in simply understanding them, at the getting started level? We know how badass this field is. Almost no other scientific field captures attention like this does. Energy, Space, Nano PS - Your series would definitely be in the list
Was Freeman Dyson an example of Earnest Becker's "Terror Management Theory" in action? A reaction to one's knowledge of personal death scaled up to the cosmic scale in deep time.
feels like you are trying to predict what a complex computer program will do without knowing anything or caring about the probably complex technologically advanced society that created and is running the program...sounds like exactly what you would expect from a semi primitive society on the knee of the curve of multiple accelerating technologies
Well, unfortunately I think majority people aren't interested in science in spare time, some of students do science only when they must to, not in spare time to learn something more.. If this was something "provocative" or easy entertaining which collect mases then it would have been maybe even millions of views..
Dear Lawrence, there is no need in energy of empty space to explain the accelerated expansion of visible universe and it will stop. Universe begins and ends in a Big Bang.
Do you mean after 10 billion years professor ?? .. because you said after 10 trillion years and then you said it's shorter then the life of some stars.
You are about 50 years late when the steady-state theory was proven wrong unless you are talking about a bouncing Universe. One of the main things I learned from Lawrence is it's ok to be wrong, and science corrects itself with better science.
@@woody7652 even scientists behind Big bang theory are in doubt and looking for other explanations go see professor Paul Steinhardt, Eric Lerner, among others...
@@sacriptex5870 If the consensus on science agreed on that I would go with it. I'm not smart enough on the subject to be thinking outside the box, but that doesn't stop me from listening, so I will check them out. Cheers.
@@lkrauss1 Evidence, Sources & Testing. Look for surprises in physics not just what's under the light. Sound familiar? You are a great Physicist, bounce back soon and BIG.
Consider that the Universe is highly influenced by an emergent Riemannian spacetime superfluid gas, which is permeating a Euclidean space, and that the gas formed from immutable, equal and opposite, charged, Planck radius spheres carrying energy. The universe is physically based upon two geometries, one foundational Euclidean geometry and one dynamical and emergent Riemannian geometry! If nature were an adversary in a game that challenges you to understand the foundations of nature itself, you’d really have to admire nature and how at the underlying geometry level it played this intelligence trick on us. Talk about dynamical. I mean this is dynamical from the get go. Who adds a second dominant geometry directly on top of the first? Nature does, that’s who. jmarkmorris.com
@@lkrauss1 Probably... I'd say probably not. You're too a complex creature. Only one great engineer could have come up with something that great... And I genuinely mean it.
Professor Krauss can you tell us when do the stars which are newly formed exactly start to revolve around the galactic center ..I mean do they start to revolve when the planets are forming or does it wait for like a billion years and then start to revolve around it's galaxy
