No video :(

Does Life Need a Multiverse to Exist?

Подписаться 3,1 млн

Просмотров 976 тыс.

50% 1

PBS Member Stations rely on viewers like you. To support your local station, go to: to.pbs.org/Dona...
↓ More info below ↓
Sign Up on Patreon to get access to the Space Time Discord!
/ pbsspacetime
Check out the Space Time Merch Store
pbsspacetime.com/
Life exists in our universe. There we go - one hopefully uncontroversial statement. Therefore our universe is capable of producing and supporting life. How am I going? Two for two? Let’s try for three: therefore there are countless universes. Hmmm. Did I break my streak?
Hosted by Matt O'Dowd
Written by Matt O'Dowd
Graphics by Leonardo Scholzer & Adriano Leal
Directed by: Andrew Kornhaber
Executive Producers: Eric Brown & Andrew Kornhaber
End Credits Music by J.R.S. Schattenberg: / @jrsschattenberg
Our universe seems to operate according to a set of fundamental rules that we try to understand and model with the equations of our laws of physics. Those equations always include one or more fundamental constants - simple numbers that set the scale for the equation. We can’t determine the values of these constants from pure theory - we have to measure them in the real universe. These are things like the speed of light, the Planck constant, the masses of the elementary particles, and the constants defining the relative strengths of the fundamental forces - the so-called coupling constants.
Special Thanks to Our Patreon Supporters
Big Bang
Alexander Tamas
Craig Stonaha
David Barnholdt
David Nicklas
Fabrice Eap
John S
Juan Benet
matt miller
Morgan Hough
Quasar
Mark Heising
Mark Rosenthal
Vinnie Falco
Hypernova
Chuck Zegar
Danton Spivey
Donal Botkin
Edmund Fokschaner
Hank S
John Hofmann
John R. Slavik
Jordan Young
Joseph Salomone
Mathew
Matthew O'Connor
Syed Ansar
Timothy McCulloch
Gamma Ray Burst
A G
Adrian Hatch
Adrien Molyneux
AlecZero
Andreas Nautsch
Bradley Jenkins
Brandon labonte
Dan Warren
Daniel Lyons
David Bethala
DFaulk
Eric Kiebler
Frederic Simon
Geoffrey Short
Graydon Goss
Greg Smith
James Flowers
Jamie Frederick
John Funai
John Griffith
John Michael Kerr
John Pollock
John Robinson
Jonathan Nesfeder
Joseph Dillman
Josh Thomas
Kevin Lee
Kevin Warne
Kyle Hofer
Malte Ubl
Michael Conroy
Nick Virtue
Nick Wright
Paul Rose
Scott Gossett
Sean Warniaha
Steve Bradshaw
Tatiana Vorovchenko
Tim Stephani
Tonyface
Yurii Konovaliuk

Опубликовано:

25 авг 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 4,1 тыс.

@user-tb4bs9po9b 4 года назад

can we all just give a shoutout to the Graphics team as the level of detail and quality of the animations and graphics adds so much to the episodes and greatly enhances Matt's fantastic presentations. god, I love this channel so much

@dirrdevil 4 года назад

Good point. I have been taking them for granted. They help so much.

@BenAtHome323 2 года назад

Totally agree! For those of us who are "visual" learners, it's the difference between "huh?" and "aha!".

@PaulSmooth 4 года назад

Last week: "We may be alone in the universe." This week: "We may be alone in the multiverse."

@recklessroges 4 года назад

Is it solipsistic in here, or is it just me?

@broomemike1 4 года назад

Yeah, it's a continuation of the same story.

@mvinod57 4 года назад

So multiverse is confirmed 👍

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

Next week: We may be alone in the omniverse.

@CCPJAYLPHAN1994 4 года назад

The sheer number of narcissism to think that we are alone

@Elec-DIY 4 года назад

"The chances of you existing are mind-boggingly low, we are extremely lucky" Me: *Opens up second can of pringles*

@TheGAMER7293 4 года назад

I'm not Christian but it sounds like God is the most likely reason for this

@dmdjt 4 года назад

@@TheGAMER7293 So there is some kind of reality finetuned so perfectly, that a god exists in it, that wanted to create an universe, that produces you? I think adding a god into this equation, just adds another layer of complexity, another layer of necessity for fine tuning.

@C--A 4 года назад

@@dmdjt you do know humans made up god, bibles, Adam & Eve just like we made up Santa Claus 🎅🏼 🤣

@C--A 4 года назад

@@TheGAMER7293 There is no god 👍🏾 closest we have to a god creator is the big bang! And I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a brain consciousness 👌🏾

@dmdjt 4 года назад

@@C--A I would suggest reading my posting again - until you think your response might be unnecessary :)

@domokato 4 года назад

There's also the possibility that different universes have different numbers of constants altogether, different types of fundamental particles, or perhaps not even having particle physics.

@CosmicNewbie 4 года назад

All the values of this universe were precisely set so that my beautiful coffee table can exist. My coffee table was the end-game of this universe and humans were merely an instrument in that process (I call it the "coffee table principle")

@RanEncounter 4 года назад

But how did you assume the values were finely set?

@piyh3962 4 года назад

There's actually a restaurant at the end of the universe, must not have gone far enough

@CosmicNewbie 4 года назад

@@RanEncounter Because no other values would have produced the conditions for my coffee table, then the ones present are the precise ones needed. Hence, it's now the "strong coffee table principle".

@trevorhunting1211 4 года назад

Coffee table pft! The universe actually exist so that my desk can exist. Don't come hear with your coffee table nonsense.

@RanEncounter 4 года назад

@@CosmicNewbie But that is circular reasoning. I say the coffee table threw a dice for so long as it was satisfied with the result. Humans were just a by product.

@beretperson 4 года назад

"don't be depressed!" He said, seconds before ending the episode with "we're totally screwing it all up."

@jovetj 4 года назад

We're not.

@jovetj 4 года назад

*@x41ih10a* Only someone with a grey beard would say that...

@jovetj 4 года назад

*@x41ih10a* No, you're not thinking. You stated grey beards don't lie, but beards cannot talk. So, instead, I took your statement to mean that people with grey beards do not lie. Which is preposterous... anyone can lie. Older people do tend to have more wisdom, but older people make mistakes just as younger people do. Lies are an intentional act, but they are still a mistake. The color of one's facial hair does not make anyone more or less trustworthy or accurate. My retort is that someone who displays a grey or greying beard might try to convince others that he is wiser or infallible, despite my previous paragraph. Thus, only someone with a grey beard (who also intends to deceive others regarding its worth and trustworthiness) would state that "grey beards (or those with them) do not lie."

@jovetj 4 года назад

You're confusing the color of your beard changes you, and not the two people you're referring to.

@caspa7 4 года назад

Moving from FullHD to 4K can be somewhat depressing if you don’t adjust the hardware dials of your video machine universe

@amira7310 4 года назад

Meanwhile marvel scrolling through youtube: Yes this one, use this idea

@dr-jalalalhrahsheh1315 4 года назад

DC already did that

@commandercaptain4664 4 года назад

But make sure not to permanently kill anyone. And throw in some Bachman Turner Overdrive, because science.

@ThanosDestroyeryearsago 4 года назад

Mira they have a multiverse In the comics.

@user-nq9eq8pb6f 4 года назад

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TG-_Vjo60GY.html

@amira7310 4 года назад

@@ThanosDestroyeryearsago It was a joke

@Nathouuuutheone 2 года назад

Or, option 4: "Fine-tuning" might be biased phrasing. Maybe those numbers are the result of something constant about the Universe and hypothetical Multiverse, something that doesn't seem nearly as arbitrary as our current formulas and constants.

@MetaphorUB 2 года назад

Or maybe one or more (or all) of them aren’t actually free to vary. It isn’t clear that the speed of light could have been some other value. So when creationists and others talk about fine-tuning and how unlikely it is that they happened to rest on these constant values, in addition to the objection you raised (which I agree with), it’s possible that these constants couldn’t have been any other values at all.

@Nathouuuutheone 2 года назад

@@MetaphorUB exactly. We only know how this Universe works. There's no basis to claim that any of it could have been different. Until we can make observations about other universes, we cannot know what decides all those properties and we cannot know what can vary and in what ways.

@MetaphorUB 2 года назад

@@Nathouuuutheone I haven’t had a conversation on YT this polite in ages. Hello, fellow nice person.

@iwatchwithnoads7480 Год назад

@@MetaphorUB starting with the assumption that it can't be anything else seems counter productive. I think the current scientific approach is that there is no reason that we know that it can't be anything else. If you can disprove that you may win a nobel prize or two

@ExistenceUniversity 4 года назад

"Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, “This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact, it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!” This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be all right, because this World was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for." -Douglas Adams

@ozzymandius666 4 года назад

The death of that man so early in life is a tragedy for humanity, the proportions of which will never be known.

@peikkojumala 4 года назад

"We have a fine tuned universe." Said while standing in the middle of billions of cubic lightyears of death.

@xplosionslite6439 4 года назад

@@peikkojumala It's not really death if there was never life to begin with..

@0ooTheMAXXoo0 4 года назад

@@peikkojumala As far as we know it takes about a galaxy worth of stars and planets to get one planet with life. This still leaves an infinite amount of planets with life on them. If all of existence is like a thought about living things, that would still match everything we see in nature. So even if we are part of a mind and everything is actually alive, we would still see what we see in nature. The only difference is a shift in how we think about scales and time.

@6Twisted 4 года назад

That puddle analogy supports the multiverse theory. When it rains not every location is suitable to form a puddle.

@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4065 4 года назад

The fact that existence exists fascinates me, and understanding everything about it is very likely to be impossible, which makes me sad because I know that one day I'll die without wrapping my head around the full story of how did I come to live in the first place.

@wallabror 4 года назад

You'll understand after you're done here.

@SapioiT 4 года назад

Simple: There are two options: You either exist, or you don't. And because you literally cannot exist if you cannot exist, then you do exist. In other words, the cases in which you don't exist do not matter.

@allan710 4 года назад

Actually even if you transcend, there are things you will never know. Suppose there are different creatures that know everything. There is nothing that one of them knows that the other doesn't, including thoughts, personality, reasoning and every derived information, including their own thoughts in every possible future. Therefore, they have the same memories, personalities and thoughts, they must be the same creature or a persistent bond (they are in sync, i.e., they are different views of the same thing) If you get to understand everything, you must be the only one entity that can do that, if there are two, they may be in different places, but they are the same regarding information (that's what matter).

@MathiasMNielsen 4 года назад

Life really is a miracle. The fact that a universe exists is a miracle. I mean, nothing is self-evident, yet here we are. Einstein is quite fascinating, how he imagined the universe was working before it could be proven with the scientific method. Why is this important? Intuitively we as human beings with all our powers of intelligence are able to imagine reality as it really is. Testing the possibilities in our minds, being struck by wonder, emotions streaming through our veins as we gaze into the depths of a sunset. Awe-inspiring. Truly amazing, how we as living beings are able to perceive and reflect on all the things around us. Questioning things. Yet, people are not allowing themselves to think. We are making restrictions to our beliefs, to our imagination, towards truth itself. Truth seem so very close, yet we deny it before it gets too close. We don't like the idea, we would rather live without truth itself. If anybody took their time to read this, and you are like me in the sense that life itself makes you deeply wonder - know this; God so loved the world, that whoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. Life is precious and so are you, created in the image of God. He loves his creation. He loves You. You might be rebelling against Him, but know that he is patient, he is forgiving, everything is by the grace of God. Existence is a mystery, it's a miracle, it is truly remarkable. Despite pain and suffering there is still Hope. We have faith in the unseen truths and realities so revealed by God through His creations, by his revelation, his presence and everlasting love. In Jesus name, Amen.

@johnbrown6347 4 года назад

@@MathiasMNielsen and the truth shall set you free, that is why I have no need to deceive myself with a god. When you grow up and learn to understand things on your own you will put away the toys of children. Only then can you honestly say you care about the truth. Till the tell yourself what you need to get by.

@SuperOnionBread 4 года назад

The study 'Experimental test of local observer independence" was recently published that suggests reality may be subjective. To my knowledge, this is the first time Wigner’s Thought Experiment has been tested in a laboratory setting. Space Time should do a video breaking this down. This is mind bending stuff.

@srofv7805 4 года назад

Or, Option 4: Life, uh, finds a way...

@dirrdevil 4 года назад

I love that you included the 'uh'. 😂

@Max__apex 4 года назад

Life finds a away 😂😂😂. How comes death finds a away then ??? Life ain’t that great buddy boy

@Soundwave1900 4 года назад

@@Max__apex In other words, physics constans just balanced each other before all stars could take shape. Why not?

@injunsun 4 года назад

@@Max__apex Death is necessary for Evolution to work. If no organism died, then when the e environment changed beyond their abilities, they'd all die. Evolution allows changes to occur that allow adaptation over time, by changing gene frequencies within populations. If a population retained its progenitors, that would always skew the gene genepool towards older, less functional genotypes, and hence phenotypes. That isn't to say that we humans shouldn't reach beyond life, to upload into computers, or into clones; we can now tweak our genomes to suit new conditions. However, before self-aware technical culture, Death was necessary. If we become immortal, 1) we'll have to reduce birthrates, perhaps by sterilisation after four children over however long; and 2) we'll need to figure out how to not allow cultures to stagnate. Some of the issues immortality brings could be obviated via interstellar colonisation.

@Max__apex 4 года назад

Herne Webber No death don’t occur so evolution can happened. There not related by a force

@KLiNoTweet 4 года назад

Physics is like reverse engineering the universe.

@karellen00 4 года назад

Maybe in the long run we could be able to finely tune the variables to create our own universe, and physics will be the recipe book to design universes for certain tasks!

@SimpleJack71 4 года назад

Perhaps its reverse math. We start at the conclusions and consequences and we want to derive the set of premises or axioms that would imply them.

@Mystixor 4 года назад

I like that thought, explains why I enjoy both :)

@alanlee1355 4 года назад

@@karellen00 one step at a time.

@PopeGoliath 4 года назад

@@SimpleJack71 I like this idea very very much.

@francescoghizzo 4 года назад

Our universe seems to be fine tuned for life AS WE KNOW IT. Different values for the fundamental constants of nature could indeed prevent the formation of stars and planets, but they could also be at the foundation of different types of physics (and therefore, chemistry) we couldn't even dream of and lead nonetheless to the emergence of complexity and self replication, i.e., what we call "life", even if in forms totally different from our own

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

Yeah, I think most people forget that. Maybe life is much more versatile than we think. :) Check out this Wiki for cool fantasy. :) Link: verse-and-dimensions.fandom.com/wiki/Verse_and_Dimensions_Wiki

@jkm7983 4 года назад

Imagine if life in other universes are energy beings

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

@@jkm7983, Somewhere in the Multiverse/Omniverse it is true. :)

@Mernom 4 года назад

There are far more configurations that don't allow ANY complex structures to exist, than potentially alternative life baring combinations.

@connoisseurofsorts2479 4 года назад

Alphabet

@Clenched.Cheeks 4 года назад

I love the little introduction jingle. I've been binging your episodes and now it's stuck in my head.

@smergthedargon8974 4 года назад

_Man looking displeased:_ Diproton _Man looking pleased:_ Helium-2

@ioresult 4 года назад

We actually get a cliffhanger! Paraphrasing, "We'll test the multiverse prediction of the strong anthropic principle in an upcoming episode". I can't wait!

@nomas9893 4 года назад

I would like to thank pbs and their supporters. Thank you guys.

@MrOvergryph 4 года назад

Should be #1 on trending. Thanks for the great content, PBS Space Time! :)

@01plindsay 4 года назад

I feel there is a fourth option. This would be that these "constants" aren't constant, but in fact variables. We are currently living in a time in which these variables have aligned to facilitate the existence of stars, planets, our Earth, and life. I do understand that a cosmic being could then be the one controlling the variables, which is basically what Matt said in option two, but forget the cosmic being, and leave it to chance...

@bizo237 4 года назад

A timeless thermalization of time, still has operation meaning. There is a monism of phase in which these variables may change. Your hypothesis is not determinable. Design as a constraint or a sweeping of potential substrates. I think the video could have done a better job defining a system, and integrating a dialect on configuration spaces, as a means relating to dynamism. Metastability, is also a very interesting criteria, however these topics very quickly go down the rabbit hole. Does life reduce the amount of entropy, by channeling least action via some sort of anticipatory partition? The SYZ conjecture can allow for the a mappable account of forces equilibrium. Yet is seems the journey of life surfs on a boundary of forces non-equilibrium.

@daviddelaney2407 4 года назад

The problem with that is that we can +see+ back nearly to the beginning of the universe, as far as we can tell. We can't see past the microwave background ... but that means that the varied conditions would be restricted to the period before that. And we do know that the plasma before then did make certain proportions of hydrogen & helium, matching theory... and that nothing left unexpected obvious patterns on the background or did anything that shone THROUGH it. So having the variables NOT vary during the entire time we can see, plus at least a few indications they didn't beforehand, makes the most reasonable proposition that they didn't vary at any time after the Bang. Dave, granted, they're not MATHEMATICAL constants, which are a whole different order of 'can't vary'

@gnarlydewd 2 года назад

Closer you are to the gate the more it changes...

@p39483 2 года назад

@@bizo237 ESL or IQ160?

@Al-ji4gd Год назад

Anything to avoid God for you folks, even if it's preposterous.

@huntersorce20 4 года назад

2:05 Another option is that while our universe seems to be very fine tuned to support life, it could be that this is simply the most stable state of settings for a universe, similar to how while there are multiple types of quarks, they all quickly decay into their most stable states of up or down quark. That life developed from those stable states isn't luck, as stated in the anthropic principle, some form of life (an observer), would eventually develop. Whether or not there are multiple universes can't be known from this.

@the-mush 4 года назад

Yeah, it feels the same way for me, like the name *_force_* seems kind of biased. Maybe they are side effects, integrations, missinterpretations or whatever of other fundamental properties, similar to the so called "centrifugal force". It's quite appealing for creating narratives and sparking the imagination, I'll give it that (as you can see on the wild tangents in the comments).

@zpe1200 4 года назад

Given enough time a universe that is stable will form.

@huntersorce20 4 года назад

@@zpe1200 True, but my point is that as matter and energy default to their most stable states over time, the settings of the fundamental constants would also default to the settings that are most stable. The inflaton field is a good example. It postulates that what drove expansion in the early universe is a false vacuum state with a non-zero vacuum energy. This decayed into true vacuum via quantum tunneling, which is its stable state and vastly slowed inflation. Similarly, other constants may or may not have been different in the very early universe, but then decayed into the stable states we observe today.

@JM-us3fr 4 года назад

Yeah I think that is the most likely scenario. If nothing else, it's at least a reason to feel like these laws of physics are special. But I'm still open to them not being special.

@hisajabness6946 4 года назад

@@beegum1 Yet all the is came from Hydrogen, heat and pressure. That alone makes me a believer in GOD

@Gerd_Hellriegel 4 года назад

The universe was fine-tuned to produce the moon. Life is just fallout.

@thetruedarksoul168 4 года назад

Gerhard Hellriegel “I don’t want to set the world on fire”

@karlbjorn1831 4 года назад

dammit lunarians

@hxhdfjifzirstc894 4 года назад

Incorrect

@thespider-man2596 4 года назад

Actually the universe isint even fine tuned! We are fine tuned to exist in this tiny solar system

@bobs182 4 года назад

The universe was created by the water god. The water god made humans for the purpose of transporting water. We drink water and pee it elsewhere.

@Spykersan 4 года назад

Hoo boy... this is one of those subjects that gets everyone in a tizzy! I've seen many arguments for and against the whole fine tuning argument, especially when dealing with those with various theistic beliefs. Though it does seem like an incredibly unlikely set of circumstances, it's possible that universes can't form any other way than ours did also (the multiverse hypothesis also being among that same kind of potential). As we can't observe and test other potential universes, it's difficult to say how likely one thing is to another. We do find that due to the universe's properties being what they are, it makes it possible to form life (at least the type of carbon based life that we're aware of), but since life isn't exactly abundant from what we've witnessed so far, I wouldn't really say that it was fine tuned for life itself and that life is just a byproduct of other things that the universe is more apt at, like black holes, stars, and many other various planetary bodies out there. Life to some extent or another would seem to me to be an inevitable byproduct of the properties of the universe and not that it was 'designed' to have life in mind.

@konberner170 4 года назад

"We will test this." Looking forward to your extra-dimensional data!

@konberner170 4 года назад

@Jason Meyer Exactly.

@konberner170 4 года назад

@Jason Meyer I think worse than dark matter. Dark matter is not said to exist in another dimension... they are looking for something here.

@RealHypeFox 4 года назад

Anyone else want Matt to flex his Aussie accent? I’ve been watching for years and have been waiting for him to go full Rippa and get so passionate that he forgets “proper-ness” and goes off in deep Aussie slang.

@Handles_Are_Bad.Phuk-them-off 4 года назад

would be good times

@eduardanielgaitan3898 4 года назад

Is he Australian? :0

@ZennExile 4 года назад

I can't get far enough past how punchable his big ozzy face is to care about how he changes his accent so people don't think he 'sounds' dumb.

@Handles_Are_Bad.Phuk-them-off 4 года назад

@@ZennExile sounds like you need an IV drip of chill. the guy has been overseas long enough to have a hybrid accent, it's pretty normal you will find.

@Handles_Are_Bad.Phuk-them-off 4 года назад

@@ZennExile I would take it from your demeanour that people report your comments for bullying or harassment and that's why they disappear. Seems that big brain of yours can't connect two dots together at the best of times.

@MrNatosMusic 4 года назад

Isn't it possible that even with different universal constants, life would have found a way to appear? It wouldn't have to look like 'our' life but I don't think that we need endless universes. Even 1 universe (which is so big that creates endless possibilities) would be enough for life to appear somewhere from some coincidence of conditions and elements brought together.

@timo4258 4 года назад

Life uh... finds a way.

@audience7264 4 года назад

Life seems to exist in a very narrow range of value & carbon seems to be the central element. Can life exist based on silicon? Nothing found so far. Can life exist as energy? Would we even recognize it as life?

@notwhatiwasraised2b 4 года назад

Unless you're a solipsist, we have this one example of life existing on Earth so we know that life is possible. However, we don't (yet) know if life can exist under different conditions. Just because a thing happens doesn't mean it will or can happen again. You are only born and die once and the event(s) that caused a memory of a memory is forever lost.

@volkhen0 4 года назад

There must be some complex reactions in such universe. If it’s only a soup of simple things that cannot interact with each other and build more complicated stuff then there is no chance of something more complicated to emerge.

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

@@volkhen0, So do you think that a Universe with 2 times as many fundamental forces and fundamental particles is more hospitable for life? I don't know, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. :)

@classicfrog80 4 года назад

Our universe is suitable for life AS WE KNOW IT. Other universes, with different parameters of the variables, may be incapable of creating and supporting life we know, but they might create other forms of life, dependant on the other set of variables.

@PranabMallick. 2 года назад

Maybe life is inevitable in all universes

@topguntk870 2 года назад

@@PranabMallick. there could be universes where every world has lifeforms of some kind on it. universes where there is no chaos but peaceful and to those aliens the question wouldnt be "is there life on other worlds" but the question to them would be "are there worlds without life" so they would be searching for the opposite because every world would have life. MIND=BLOWN. if there are infinite universes then everything imaginable exists including what i stated. that being said there could be universes without physics or chemistry or any recognizable feature but somehow creates lifeforms of its own kind. or universes where paradoxes are normal and nothing makes sense but there would be insane alien logic like lifeforms where its universe runs backwards so it dies first then gets younger and younger instead of older and until its born.....so death would be birth and birth would be death in that universe. according to max tegmark every and any possible universe exists. scary stuff.

@DeathNight77 2 года назад

agreed

@DenizenCain Год назад

It's only 'lucky' if you presume that life was somehow the goal in all of this. It's equivalent to throwing a ball in a random direction, drawing a circle around where it lands, and saying it's lucky that the ball landed in that circle.

@dale7326 Год назад

Because luck is an imaginary number or chance that you get a critical

@KeiS14 Год назад

Good point, perhaps we-and the rest of life here-are just freak accidents.

@adh0c468 Год назад

No, life is incredibly complex and improbable. In terms of your analogy, it would be like throwing a ball in a random direction in a field and having it land perfectly on top of a thin stick in the ground, which would indeed be lucky.

@Richardincancale 4 года назад

2:34 You forgot case 0: These dial settings are interlinked in such a way that these are the only possible settings. I.e. a Uni-verse and not a Multi-verse.

@arminwalland 4 года назад

I had the same thought :)

@Aquillyne 4 года назад

Well said

@johnbrown6347 4 года назад

Thank you, the constants do not exist independently they interact with each other and that is the fine tuning of the one verse.

@hxhdfjifzirstc894 4 года назад

Richard Deasington They flail to deny the obvious

@caineblackknife2443 4 года назад

Actually no, they didn't forget. That is effectively the same thing as case 1.

@bophadesnutz3313 4 года назад

The anthropic principle, or in laymans terms, "we live in a universe"

@Doattt 4 года назад

The memetic principle: "we live in a society capable of producing memes", or in memer's terms: "we live in a society"

@lock_ray 4 года назад

Bottom Quark

@Handles_Are_Bad.Phuk-them-off 4 года назад

@@Doattt when you are that new you don't think memes exist in nature.

@maxkho00 4 года назад

More like "our universe is special because we live in it".

@Merennulli 4 года назад

@@maxkho00 No, it's a tautology. "We live in it, so therefore it must be a universe in which we can live."

@Disgruntledgamer 4 года назад

How do you know these dials are free dials or that we just haven't discovered the theory or part of a theory that predicts them?

@thenasadude6878 4 года назад

He does not know that, but the best present day theories (quantum mechanics and general relativity) require all those dials. So our current understanding of the universe requires those dials. There are hypothesis that aim at reducing the number of dials, but for the time being, they do not come together in a theory that works better than QM and GR

@flyerfan8 4 года назад

@jacks-over he states at the beginning there may be a deeper theory that sets the dials that hasn’t been discovered yet

@AnonymOus-ss9jj 4 года назад

While I agree with the previous two comments, and that Mat mentioned such might be the case. Just explaining why the values are the way they are isn't going to solve things. Unless it is discovered that the variables in question are illusions there will always be the "coincidence" of them being set for life. Instead of replying to every person individually about these topics I've decided to try putting my thoughts on a separate page and just posting links to that page fallaciesinevolution.blogspot.com/p/the-anthropic-principal-and-multiverse.html that being said writing for both intelligent openminded people and fools who will refuse to understand a word I say that isn't pounded into their heads, is quite difficult. I'm not sure if it will go over well.

@joebainter 4 года назад

This guy always leaves me feeling inadequate! But, soldier on Dude. I wanna know more!

@TheExoplanetsChannel 4 года назад

Ingredients for life to _survive:_ air, water and *PBS Space Time* videos

@leninthebeaniesouhacker.2459 4 года назад

Also underrail.

@eifelitorn 4 года назад

or more precisely, life as we know it.

@ttopperr 4 года назад

Don’t forget copulation.

@zerid0 4 года назад

How likely is it for a universe to be able to produce a PBS youtube channel ?

@ttopperr 4 года назад

Columini 100% with the exception not all individuals are able to access the internet.

@kevind814 4 года назад

"The universe is a pretty big place. If it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space." - Carl Sagan

@jimmurphy6095 4 года назад

He also said, "In order to make an apple pie from scratch, you first have to create the universe."

@RsZ789 4 года назад

You're so vain, you probably think this universe is about you.

@AmbrosiaDreamWeaver 4 года назад

@@RsZ789 The best comment... "You're so VAAAAIIIINN!!!!"

@brianhirt5027 4 года назад

He lacked perspective on that call. Step back and take a longer view. we're JUST 13.7 billion years in. All the galaxies are still just barely getting all the lights on and hung up. Star formation looks to be vigorous for another hundred billion years. The party itself has anywhere from ten trillion to a hundred trillion years bump and thump across a expanding space/time dance floor hundreds of billions light years wide. Humans are just such overly enthusiastic, socially awkward goofballs that we gate crashed the party early. Like, stupid early. Like, showing up a few days early to your BFF's birthday party stupid early. Chill homie. We ain't alone. We're just the setup crew who gotta get the decorations up, get those flyers posted up everywhere, laser light show going, get the band schedule worked out, the bar stocked & ready, and that snack table loaded for bear. It's just on us to make this party dope AF as the other players start makin the scene

@deusexaethera 4 года назад

Carl Sagan had a very small ego. Most people's egos need much more space to be comfortable.

@AlphaFoxDelta 4 года назад

"Why do we exist?" ... "Because everything that can, exists" ... Theory or most probable answer aside, it is incredible to think that we know the answer to the ultimate question. ... It almost feels bad to say, though. Just imagine what that implies. The best, the worst, everything.

@markonekic1917 4 года назад

There is no reason for our existence...😔

@mikeconrad1183 4 года назад

@@markonekic1917 we can never be sure

@endthisnonsense7202 3 года назад

Because we exist.

@DaveTexas 4 года назад

I subscribe to the Douglas Adams philosophy of a fine-tuned universe - Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, “This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact, it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!”

@nathanharvey8570 4 года назад

The problem with that is that if any of the dimensionless constants or starting conditions for the universe were any different, you wouldn't have a universe capable of complex chemistry in the first place. Everything would instantly implode, or the only things that exist would be hydrogen atoms repelling each other, etc. Which would be more like not having any rain nor any holes in the ground in which a puddle could form, to draw upon the analogy.

@DaveTexas 4 года назад

Nathan Harvey That has absolutely nothing to do with the argument. The universe is still not fine-tuned for us. The universe simply is what it is. Fine-tuning implies causality and purpose, whereas the universe - and us - are here only by chance. Fine-tuning is seeing the outcome of 105 minus 27 equals 78 and saying, "This equation was fine-tuned to equal 78," when in reality an infinite number of equations would have resulted in an answer of 78 and an infinite number of equations would have resulted in an answer that is not 78. You just happen to be looking at the equation that has 105 minus 27 as the starting conditions. No fine-tuning of anything. The puddle argument is meant to ridicule religious people who claim that the universe was made so they specifically would exist. No one fine-tuned anything. Nothing is fine-tuned for life. Life is just a result of the conditions that happen to exist.

@nathanharvey8570 4 года назад

@@DaveTexas The point I was making is that fine tuning to produce humans, observers, or life in general doesn't matter, because the universe IS fine tuned to allow chemistry to happen, i.e. to have >1 elements that can interact with each other over time. There are no other conditions other than the ones this universe has, that's why there's videos like this about the multiverse.

@DaveTexas 4 года назад

Nathan Harvey No, sweetie. Multiverse theory does not, and cannot, show that different conditions exist elsewhere. You have to be able to test something to prove it. You cannot test anything about the multiverse. Please leave your pseudo-scientific pop-culture ideas to the uneducated and go back to googling things to think you’re educating yourself.

@nathanharvey8570 4 года назад

@@DaveTexas You seem very emotional about this.

@mayhemdiscordchaosohmy573 4 года назад

I don't remember who first stated it and I love its Simplicity and its Elegance. My favorite quote: "You're the product of four and a half billion years of evolutionary success, f****** act like it!"

@0ooTheMAXXoo0 4 года назад

That is evolution of life on the planet earth. The observable universe is much older and all that exists has to have existed for an infinite amount of time. If there was a start, what precipitated the start and so on until you get to some kind of energy that has always existed.

@elman2012 4 года назад

"Spider Juice points out..." with a totally straight face. Hah!

@AlphaFoxDelta 4 года назад

That got me hahah

@elman2012 4 года назад

This show brings everyone together, it's so great.

@ColtonSpace 4 года назад

I was expelled out of high school half way through my sophomore year, and these videos from the bottom to the top explain in enough detail and have been articulated well enough that if you stay interested you can sort of keep up. Thanks to our awesome host!

@rujulmanjarley5911 4 года назад

forget life, the question i want to know first, does a single universe need a multiverse to exist ?

@user-ep8ns6hg4q 3 года назад

Single verse*, idk why everyone keeps referring to it as "Uni" when not speaking of it as singular, if it's a multiverse then we just live in one verse, if there is no multiverse then we live in a universe.

@thelelanatorlol3978 3 года назад

@@user-ep8ns6hg4q People use universe when talking about universes for the same reason that people use galaxy in a universe where many galaxies exist and planet in a universe where many planets exist. Universe refers to a singular while multiverse is the plural of universe.

@user-ep8ns6hg4q 3 года назад

@@thelelanatorlol3978 the term universes is an oxymoron in itself as the word is expressing singular with uni and multi with the s, the proper word would simply be verses or when describing them as a whole - multiverse.

@bvo.. 3 года назад

@@user-ep8ns6hg4q unfortunately universe came into lexicon before multiverse. Yes it’s true, universe means everything in existence. But atoms also means smallest things observable, and that’s not true either. the words are stuck haha

@user-ep8ns6hg4q 3 года назад

@@bvo.. The singular Universe is a compilation of Micro-verses, Teenie-verses or Mini-verses. So the Multi-Verse is a compilation of Micro-verses, Teenie-verses or Mini-verses. Therefore the Multiverse and Universe are the same thing..... It should still just be, "In this verse" or "that verse".

@Miss-Hellcat666 4 года назад

I'm gonna watch this later tonight when I go to bed. I just love drifting off to sleep, dreaming about space and physics and stuff.

@talltroll7092 4 года назад

Can't you just count PzIVs?

@GH-bz2vl 4 года назад

Same 🙏

@InvntdXNEWROMAN 4 года назад

Here I am, 11:12 pm. Watching this video while I drift off to sleep and reading other people's comments, haha. We probably don't have much in common, but this is one.

@_swordfern 4 года назад

Every. Night.

@notquiteordinary 4 года назад

I love going to sleep listening to fairy tales, that's why I listen to this channel.

@kobil316SH 4 года назад

Im sad that this channel won’t always be a thing, it’s incredible

@BenMitro 4 года назад

sadder still is that you won't always be a thing either.

@nUrnxvmhTEuU 4 года назад

@@BenMitro Bah, I don't really care. But PBS Spacetime, that's what defines humanity!

@BenMitro 4 года назад

@@nUrnxvmhTEuU fair point Michal

@Takahanazawa 2 года назад

Everyone always forgets the fourth possibility: that there are higher laws or metaphysical principles that dictate/demand that the relevant physical constants are what they are. They only appear fine-tuned to us because we assume all values of these constants must be equally likely - which might not be the case. These might be the only allowable values for reasons we don't yet understand.

@galerius07 4 года назад

2:06 It seems like there are other possibilities that might be worth considering. Off the top of my head, I wondered if you could plausibly suggest that the different forces and their constants relate to one-another in such a way that they are only stable at the values we find, or are governed by a broader natural law that forces them into their current values. In that case, what appears to be fine-tuned constants would actually be inevitable. The other thought I had was that it seems like in any system with rules, you find interesting patterns and emergent properties. For example, when you change the axioms of geometry to get some form of non-euclidean geometry, the euclidean theorems stop working, but then you find new theorems that only work in non-euclidean systems. Similarly, if you change the constants of our universe, you might destroy any possibility for chemistry as we know it, but perhaps it opens the door for some otherworldly chemistry that we either can't or haven't yet been able to predict. In this case, it might be exceptionally difficult or even impossible to have a universe that doesn't allow life in one form or another.

@hoodglasses8237 4 года назад

This seems like a good time to take my lunch break.

@Jakthemoron 4 года назад

Early lunch for Konzu

@nlhernandez39 4 года назад

Lol

@WodkaEclair 4 года назад

2:27 Option 4, these values, for some reason, are the only valid values

@altrag 4 года назад

That's kind of string theory's hypothesis in a way. ST essentially only has one free parameter -- the choice of Calabi-Yau manifold that produces the underlying physics of the strings. That's a significant improvement from 20+ free parameters. Of course there's still two pretty massive problems with ST: First, that single free parameter has something like 10^500 possible values, and many of those would even lead to a universe "like" ours (maybe not identical but close enough that we don't have an obvious way to distinguish them.) So that still means our universe has a very, very, very small chance of being the right one -- ie: we're still finely tuned in some (currently) inexplicable way. Second, we have no way to prove ST with our currently technology, nor any foreseeable technology. Probing things at the ST level will require accelerators dozens of orders of magnitude more powerful than the LHC and while they might not be _completely_ impossible for humanity to build one day, that day is very unlikely to happen in the next few spans of a human lifetime given that each new generation of accelerator is pushing the order of 40-50 years from conception to first light. And even with that much time, we'll still probably need to figure out brand new accelerator designs as it would take an accelerator on the scale of the orbit of Earth around the Sun in order to hit those energies if we just try to directly scale up our current designs. But new designs _are_ theoretically possible. For example if we can find a way to produce and harness muons in sufficient quantity, a muon-based collider could produce _significantly_ more energy than its electron-based equivalent. Harnessing muons is a big ask to be sure, but probably more plausible than us ever having the engineering capabilities to construct a Dyson collider.

@derAtze 4 года назад

@@altrag what is a muon?

@altrag 4 года назад

@@derAtze Heavier cousin of the electron. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon#:~:targetText=The%20muon%20(%2F%CB%88mju%CB%90,is%20classified%20as%20a%20lepton. Heavier implies more energy (E=mc^2) so if you can replace an electron beam with a muon beam in a collider, you will get a more energetic collision (~207x more energetic.) Trouble is, muons aren't easy to produce (basically only being produced in other high-energy collisions) and they have very short half-lives (on the scale of microseconds,) so you'd have a very, very short window to produce them, separate them from the other junk and focus them into a beam for the collision. Almost all of those steps are difficult (but not impossible) to do individually with current technology, but trying to make them all happen in order and with enough muons to give the beam any useful strength.. that's a long way off.

@cripplingautism5785 4 года назад

that doesn't do anything to resolve the fine tuning issue though. what are the chances that the only possible values of the constants are exactly the ones capable of producing life? i'd be much more surprised if this were the case, as you wouldn't even be able to appeal to a multiverse to explain it away.

@WodkaEclair 4 года назад

@@cripplingautism5785 it doesn't 'resolve' it, but it is a possibility, and should have been mentioned if only to say 'but that's not interesting and irrelevant to today's topic'.

@tyrvinodinson9790 4 года назад

We haven't managed to get off the earth yet, apart from the moon landing and the space station. We've also had 6 near life ending situations. Also considering how far it would be to get to another habitable planet, and actually surviving there. I'm sure there is life in the galaxy apart from us, I just don't think it's an easy thing to stroll around saying hello.

@KingfisherTalkingPictures 2 года назад

This is like the Fermi paradox. We have a sample of 1. More samples are needed.

@enotdetcelfer 4 года назад

Physics simulation - Hard mode: iterate through the settings and figure out the bifurcation map of possible setting that support self-propagating pattern entities.

@almachizit3207 4 года назад

I really like this idea. Trying to find which combinations of the fundimental constants lead to complex structures capable of self replication in order to map out the probability of a given universe containing life.

@111455 4 года назад

i'l stick to talking to women, that's hard enough!

@critlangford7410 4 года назад

This is a great idea. Also perhaps the best argument for us being the ones in a simulation. Our creators just wanted to know which parameters succeed. For their own PBS Spacetime vids.

@broomemike1 4 года назад

-Conclusion Life is due to rounding errors in the simulationa.

@tentative_flora2690 4 года назад

I can tell you we have on a small scale and ours is definately not the only universe that supports life. Though if you paint the target arround the arrow and constrain your definition of life to things this universe can do thats not entirely accurate.

@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos 4 года назад

There is one big problem (R. Penrose pointed that out): *Entropy is globally fine-tuned but a locally variable quantity.* Hence a multiverse theory together with the anthropogenic principal can not explain this. R. Penrose developed later his *CCC-model* which can explain the fine tuning of entropy too. *Are there any other models capable of explaining this strange fine-tuning?* Furthermore I want to point out two things: 1. It is a very human thing to see parameter in the theory different from the theory itself. On a mathematical level there is no difference between a parameter and a choice of the model. Then why consider the variation of the former but not the later. 2. Fine tuning for constants (or models) where we have never seen a variation is strange to consider. And there might very well be a deeper explanation but we simply don't see the pattern. But the fine tuning of entropy does not have this problem. We know that it can vary. We know that it is globally fine-tuned. ... *The only fine-tuning problem we are sure of is not solved by a normal multiverse theory.*

@JM-us3fr 4 года назад

Agreed

@AbeDillon 4 года назад

What do you mean by "we know that [entropy] is globally fine-tuned"? In what way is entropy globally fine-tuned?

@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos 4 года назад

@@AbeDillon ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yDqny7UzyR4.html

@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos 4 года назад

@@AbeDillon The entropy was low enough such that stars could form all over the place. More precisely the entropy in gravity was low enough in the initial state of the universe. From the CMB we see that this fine tuning happened at least in the visible universe. But why? The anthropogenic principal explains fine tuning only where we live. But why is the whole visible universe entropically fine tuned for life?

@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos 4 года назад

addendum: CCC: short: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ftjwnjR0apY.html longer, part 1: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-sM47acQ7pEQ.html longer, part 2: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-FVDJJVoTx7s.html

@oberonpanopticon Год назад

One of the most interesting and somewhat outlandish Fermi paradox solutions I’ve heard is that perhaps not only is travel between universes possible, but easier than travel between stars. After all, if you can just punch a wormhole that leads you to a planet identical to yours except everyone was just killed by a gamma ray burst, it’d make significantly more sense to just go there and pick up where they left off than to spend decades and a colossal amount of energy travelling to another star, building infrastructure and terraforming the planets there.

@kingshanaman 4 года назад

Every time I start believing that life is simple then this channel convinces me I might be living in a matrix.

@gisele8337 4 года назад

you are, this comment is simply a part of ur simulation.

@pierfrancescopeperoni 3 года назад

You are a Boltzmann brain.

@rsfakqj10rsf-33 3 года назад

Ever wonder why your universe is kind of chunky, yeah, this stimulation is running on a crappy potato

@pierfrancescopeperoni 3 года назад

@@rsfakqj10rsf-33 And the simulation is run by a Boltzmann brain.

@joshuakahky6891 4 года назад

*PLEASE cover the weak force soon! I don't know anything about how it works!*

@hooliganbubsy7298 4 года назад

There's another possibility other than the three he said. 4. There's an unknown factor that predisposes a universe to these settings

@parthsarda2793 3 года назад

'The whole world needs to be balanced, too much on one sides too much to the other leads to imbalance which isn't good anyone'. - Thanos

@CDLynas 4 года назад

Our understanding of what life is and how it can exist is so infinitesimally small it would be impossible for us to currently tell what universal configurations allow for life and those that do not. Keep learning, keep discovering and rule out nothing.

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

Yeah, humility helps a lot in this case. :)

@Modzybear 4 года назад

Can “life” be more generalized? Such as a system that works to decrease entropy locally in order to spawn additional systems. Would these generalized systems exist in other universes?

@Reddles37 4 года назад

Sure, but the argument is that in the majority of possible universes there wouldn't be any complex systems at all. In particular if there are other universes with bigger cosmological constants, most of them would expand so fast that they just rip everything apart and you end up with universes just full of empty space. I think we can probably all agree that there isn't life there... In fact, the argument only works in the first place if we use an extremely general definition like yours. If you try to be specific then it breaks down because if some life does exist then it will evolve to fit whatever the conditions are.

@Wakssbm 4 года назад

@@Reddles37 Now imagine the very few (yet infinite) universes that are more complex than our own. Imagine a universe where "life" becomes eternal and gains control all over it. Does it become like, a solved universe or something?

@commandercaptain4664 4 года назад

@@Reddles37 I dunno. That smacks of geocentrism to me. This universe is can be no more central to existence as Earth isn't to this universe.

@kasperbuskpedersen 4 года назад

You seriously upped your graphics for this episode, super awesome! Keep it coming

@ben3364 4 года назад

It's refreshing he included God as a possible explanation. Religious and non-religious need to openly consider and explore all possibilities.

@GMike2000 4 года назад

Those that hold to a non-religious or not created viewpoint have to either believe an infinite universe where laws can be different or a multiverse. That is the same reason the panspermia theory exists. Life is so complicated it must have formed somewhere else. Also simulation theory which may be the new digital religion ;)

@SpiritualFox 4 года назад

@@GMike2000 This whole thing smacks of 'spark of life creatorism'. We're working backwards from the 'premise of humanity,' which is about the same as working backwards from 'God exists.' Viewed as a naturally emergent chemical phenomenon, all the different axes that measure universal law become an intrinsic part of life, rather than factors to be assessed when looking for a distant planet to colonize. Another assumption, specifically, of 'special earth' is required to embark on this self-important use of earthlife as a multiverse litmus test. Basically: What were the odds that your mom and dad would do it in a chevy? Multiverse confirmed because every atom was in the exact right place for the miracle of life. Trust me, it's a religious theory.

@damienroberts934 4 года назад

Atheist neo darwinist cosmologists could not cope with the facts of a "beginning" and "fine tuning" in the universe among other things. So they panicked and invented the "multiverse". No facts can be allowed to get in the way of trivialising human beings and dismissing God.

@SpiritualFox 4 года назад

@@damienroberts934 en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_universe Physicist Victor Stenger objected to the fine-tuning, and especially to theist use of fine-tuning arguments. His numerous criticisms included what he called "the wholly unwarranted assumption that only carbon-based life is possible."[25] In turn, the astrophysicist Luke Barnes has criticised much of Stenger's work.[26] The validity of fine tuning examples is sometimes questioned on the grounds that such reasoning is subjective anthropomorphism applied to natural physical constants. It's like the whole thing was thought up by some fringe tribal people with a severe ingroup bias.

@jackrakken4127 4 года назад

Him- "Here's one totally uncontroversial statement " Me- "F U SCIENCE MAN! I BELIEVE WHAT I WANNA!"

@doughauck57 4 года назад

He keeps leaving out "... like our own" whenever he says "necessary for life". If there are other universes with different constants, the (unrecognizable to us) life there could be wondering how they got so lucky.

@theheini5329 4 года назад

That may be right but we dont know if such life is even possible, assuming life in different ways than our own can exist without knowing if its even possible is just guesswork, if we could create silicon-based (or any kind really)life in a computersimulation and prove that life (or just the formation of dna) is possible in a way different than we know of, than this line of thought has merits.

@theheini5329 4 года назад

@vince furchill Only if there is a possibility of life in other forms are possible in the first place, the option of it not even beng possible is still a thing so no matter if infinite universes exist, if its 0 than its 0.

@vikraal6974 4 года назад

Infinity is a mathematical term, it's not real

@TimTeatro 4 года назад

@vince furchill - May or may not be infinite. It depends on which multiverse model you talk about. If you're a string theorist, it isn't an infinite landscape of universes, just a big one.

@TimTeatro 4 года назад

@@vikraal6974 That's not much of an argument. Even if it is true that infinity, as a concept, is not something that can be reflected in nature, your argument fails. “Three” is a mathematical term. So is “the square of the radius.” By your argument, mathematical terms don't exist, so neither does “three”, or conservative forces in spherical volumes.

@theothercivilization3154 4 года назад

I was brought to this video after searching for "How to make a really good hot cup of tea".

@commandercaptain4664 4 года назад

Sounds like you got your answer. Because multiversal dials.

@CookingSkinny 4 года назад

Lol!! 😂🤣😂

@Chillerll 4 года назад

You need a tutorial to make tea?

@ChrisBrengel 4 года назад

This is such a great channel. I can always count on fascinating topics discussed seriously, not wasting my time, and I just assume that the latest scientific understanding is being presented. It's never like I'm listening to someone who doesn't quite know what they are talking about or who just finished reading one article on it. This is the real deal.

@anderspaulsson 2 года назад

The universe is only finely tuned because we compare it to our own existence. To other hypothetical forms of life this universe could be catastrophic.

@ciCCapROSTi 4 года назад

2:32 The fourth option is that many settings of dials allow for some kind of life, just not life as we understand it.

@nate7790 4 года назад

Agreed

@Gunshinzero 4 года назад

That's not the point though. There are plenty of ways to make a working vehicle but there are infinitely more ways to make non-functioning one (or better yet, something that isn't a vehicle at all).

@Baggydawg1 4 года назад

Literally love this channel so much. So much time, effort and referenced, coherent information, presented brilliantly by the charismatic Matt. Thank you!

@nofanealbni 4 года назад

Why does an apparent unlikelihood need justification as a likelihood?

@Ultrameowmeow 4 года назад

What's missing is the interdimensional aspect of our reality versus the belief in multiple universes. There are multiple dimensions / planes of existence

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

See this wiki. :) Link: verse-and-dimensions.fandom.com/wiki/Verse_and_Dimensions_Wikia

@benlaffin6466 4 года назад

Thank you for bringing up the emotional stakes of being alone in the universe! I was particularly inspired by the idea of our responsibility to take advantage of our rare position. It actually helped rebound me through a rough day.

@nate7790 4 года назад

I think I understand and agree with you. I rather think of it as a responsibility we have with respect to the universe and life in general than of a hopeless quest for others out there. In some way, we are in the dark and are left to choose whether we want to let the darkness be our only universe of if we want to be a light. While writing this I just had a crazy idea: should we start sending some simpler, more resistant, life forms towards other star systems in hopes that they may find a place to settle and carry on the history of life if we (our species, or even our entire planet's life) disappear of simply never leave our own star system? Then again we'd face the question: what if our attempt to spread life encounters already existing life elsewhere and kills it off?

@allan710 4 года назад

@vince furchill Of course not. There are infinity others simulations with weird creatures besides this one. The kind developers sometimes even put some additional creatures here and there on earth too! They even have spaceships (although they are deleted once they leave the sphere of simulation, like all good NPCs). Glitches happen too, but not too frequently. source: I'm a player, and I'm free to write here because nobody will ever consider this being serious, what a convenience! This is actually the best game I ever played. Next month (it may be longer since the time here is accelerated) the patch with dinosaurs will return! Note: this is not a serious answer, it is just a point to show that if someone says something plausible and possibly true but not widely accepted on the internet, they have no point. Living in a simulation is a fairly good point, if we examine how the constants work. In this scenario, aliens are nothing! I want to talk to a "developer". And the argument of an evil or elusive government is overshadowed by the argument of editing the simulation. Even a contact may be false and just an edition in the simulation. Even the aliens can't prove the universe being a simulation being false. Unproved things (at least widely not accepted) are the way they are for a reason. It's impossible for me here to disprove anything you say or confirm. Note: this is a double not serious answer. Disregard anything I said before, because I don't believe in nothing of what I said. Note: this is a triple not serious answer. I am just procrastinating writing random stuff to random guys on random channels because I'm not feeling like doing my chores. This is actually a big bad joke. I'm just blabbering. This escalated very quickly, the best "not-at-all-useful" comment of the century. I should add a citation to an impactful end: "[...] the squirrel, so do Mayonnaise. " Unknown (This text was auto-generated by talktotransformer.com... right?)

@Jasondurgen 4 года назад

Nate are you suggesting we get a massive moon-sized cannon and fire sextillions of water bears into the sea of black that surrounds us

@nate7790 4 года назад

@@Jasondurgen I wasn't thinking this precisely but yes, sort of. I was suggesting selecting life forms that could withstand the trip, placing them in containers that would allow them to survive the voyage and sending them towards selected solar systems where we think they may be able to live and thrive if conditions happen to be as we hope.

@samanthaqiu3416 4 года назад

We have all these galaxies to make more engineered solar systems that will breed more people that will know that Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself

@TimTeatro 4 года назад

I've always found the statement that “life depends on these constants having values in very narrow ranges” to be a failure of imagination. Of course, it's correct to say “life such as ours” or “carbon-based life” but who knows how many mechanisms for life and general intelligence proliferate, especially if the laws of nature are varied.

@useodyseeorbitchute9450 4 года назад

So the point is that out of effectively infinite number of potential combination, there was not one but ex. a few dozens potential combinations in which life was possible?

@MathiasMNielsen 4 года назад

But could it be said that these narrow ranges is describing how any functioning and stable universe must be? If any universe would be expanding by an slower of faster rate any universe would fall apart. The same could be said with the rest of these constants, not permitting atoms to form in stable connections thus permitting molecules and later life to "evolve". The part of atoms evolving into conscious life is a giant leap of faith whereas imagination as you say either fails or comes as a miracle. We are talking about probabilities that far outweighs any logical sentiment. It's truly amazing how the "machinery" inside each and every cell is working, replicating itself and repairing itself. I like the analogy of a computer code. If you suggested that the code for RU-vid one day made itself on a computer making random changes to it's own code starting from 0 you would be insane! Yet, in our universe there is somehow an underlying code that permit these strange and miraculous events to occur! Everything is pointing towards the engineer, the master-coder, the watch-maker. God. Who took the shape of human beings, descending from Heaven, beyond the "computer (our world)" into our world as the human we call Jesus. And thus telling us the truth, that whoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

@hxhdfjifzirstc894 4 года назад

Failure of your understanding...

@useodyseeorbitchute9450 4 года назад

@@hxhdfjifzirstc894No, when I heard it first time decades ago, THEN it was interesting. When I see it rehashed again and again, while people who post it expect some attention and admiration, I simply scroll further.

@dbk5816 4 года назад

Simply because you could imagine something doesn't mean it's plausible. You could imagine yourself lifting the pyramids, the fact you can do so doesn't make the idea possible. There is a good reason to think the range is indeed very narrow if you understood the implications of the variation of the constants of nature. For example, if the cosmological constant was slightly greater than it is, stars, planets, galaxies wouldn't form. And since stars wouldn't have formed, you would end up with no chemistry as well.

@pyr8878 4 года назад

Overestimating the importance of life in or to the universe, underestimating the resilience and drive of life to survive, and occasionally, momentarily, flourish.

@bryanblatz2001 4 года назад

The concept of infinity described by IQ IQ 80- You mean it goes on forever, that's cool. IQ 100- It goes on forever? Woah! IQ 120- Hummm...seems improbable... IQ 140- ERROR 404-MULTIVERSE! IQ 160- It just goes on forever.

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

What about IQ 180, 200, 220 etc.? :)

@gregbrockway4452 4 года назад

Our universe sits stuffed far into the back of some alien kid’s closet because he only got a C- at the science fair.

@harshvatwani2202 4 года назад

But it will be appreciated years later when someone discovers it accidentally.

@versag3776 4 года назад

Hahaha, Yeah like God got a C- when programming the parameters for life. He either got an A+ for figuring it out or an F for copying a working model.

@blinkin304 4 года назад

@@versag3776 what if he was trying to create a sterile environment and failed? it all depends on the goal and how it was presented.

@commandercaptain4664 4 года назад

@@blinkin304 Itwas presented with a bunch of "thous" and "thees", with an unhealthy smattering of deus ex machina and co-dependence. God was lucky to get a C-.

@MrSigmaSharp 4 года назад

Oh I love this arc. I hope next videos come sooner but never ends

@samuelmelcher333 4 года назад

I’m studying history at university, and I’m so glad I have a term for the Anthropic Principle. I’ve been trying to argue basically this point in relation to nuclear war for a long time. People say things like “We were way closer to nuclear war in the 60’s and we made it out of that just fine. See, mutually assured destruction works, so there’s hardly any need to worry about nuclear war in the future, and thus there’s no need for disarmament.” My point is that we only avoided nuclear war by pure chance a couple times, and a lack of nuclear war is a precondition for us to be alive and discussing this, so given that obviously nuclear war hasn’t happened, but that gives absolutely zero information about the probability of future nuclear war and provides no guarantee whatsoever that we will be safe in the future, so we should absolutely worry about disarmament ASAP

@alexolas1246 4 года назад

you know what’s something i want to know? why does our universe have 3 spatial dimensions. tbh, i ask this more out of jealousy than anything. i’ve been learning about higher dimensions lately, and imo a 4D universe would be much more elegant & fun than our 3D one. 4D space has six perfect polytopes (like our 3D universe’s five platonic solids), whereas all higher dimensions 5D and above have only a repeating pattern of three. there’s also that if you put sixteen hyperspheres with radius 1m at the edges of a tesseract (4D cube), then you can fit an extra hypersphere right in the middle with the exact same radius - a symmetry unique to 4D space. you also get to have actual klein bottles, instead of the knockoff self-intersecting ones our reality is cursed with

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

So 5D and up is boring again according to you?

@TimoleanJ 4 года назад

My daughter saw me watching this video and said "That's a beautiful man dada!" I couldn't agree more xD

@saphcal 4 года назад

i very nice voice too.

@schmuak 4 года назад

I thought he looked a bit pale

@Arcterion 4 года назад

I strongly want there to be a multiverse. I cannot live without the thought that there is a universe filled entirely with catgirls.

@erik-ic3tp 4 года назад

Beyond the Multiverse is even cooler. :) Like the Omniverse. :) Link: verse-and-dimensions.fandom.com/wiki/Omniverse

@hxhdfjifzirstc894 4 года назад

Arcterion There is not. So sad!

@pawekopytek7596 3 года назад

It would be nice if there was some indication of which video is the "upcoming" one where he'll continue with the topic

@Lazarosaliths 4 года назад

So we are questioning why our overlords make the cosmologically constants the way they are ao that the simulation wont crash!!!

@thenasadude6878 4 года назад

The best part seems to be that the last patch was applied a very long time ago, we've been running on stable for some billion years now

@Seytom 4 года назад

@@thenasadude6878 Billions of years for us, a few hours for our cosmic overlords. Almost the end of the day for them, hope they don't shut it all down.

@girv98 4 года назад

Life is only going to appear in a universe that can support life. So surely, we're gonna find ourselves in one of those universes, no matter how 'finely tuned it may be.

@JustinL614 4 года назад

But when considering probability of life..if you started producing universes randomly it would be highly unlikely that any of them would have that fine tuning.. unless you were able to "roll the dice" nearly forever.. where does all that energy come from?

@sankhyohalder97 4 года назад

@@JustinL614 I'm far from a physicist, but as far as I am aware, we don't know if the conservation of mass-energy even means anything in the context of the multiverse. I also recall speculation that the positive and negative energy of our universe could cancel out to a net zero, at which point creating a new universe might not cost anything at all. Or course, take this with a big heap of salt, I might and probably am wrong about the concept or at least the implications!

@McLainCausey 4 года назад

Well, that's effectively the anthropic principle.

@kyjo72682 4 года назад

@@JustinL614 I don't think conservation of energy applies here. It would only apply within our own space-time.

@suryaya441 4 года назад

That's a tautology that does not solve the problem. The problem is that the conditions required for us to even be here and observe the universe seem fine tuned.

@jacoboneill2494 4 года назад

Even with the ranges being, in our terms, so narrow, there would still be infinitely many life-bearing universes, if reality is infinite. They'd all be extremely far apart, though. I think that how we divide reality is generally arbitrary, so I'd say whether or not there's a multiverse is a matter of perspective/semantics.

@AndyHage 4 года назад

Does the simulation hypothesis even fit in here? Wouldn't it just mean that they then got either extremely lucky or there are lots of different universes?

@Anthony-lf2kg 4 года назад

Andy Hage Interesting thought. How do we even know if “they” the creators of the simulation define this universe as a success? Could just be 1 in millions that have created. How would they even define a successful simulation or us even be able to comprehend what they were looking for?

@dbk5816 4 года назад

"Simulation hypothesis"- An atheists's way of admitting the believe in a god. The difference between theists and atheists is not big after all. Theists believe in a God, Atheists believe in a timeless computer scientist.

@brawnyjavier 4 года назад

@@dbk5816 😂😂 exactly

@dsmith1723 4 года назад

I know many of you may not easily believe that a God of good purpose has finely tuned our existence, but as a believer myself I cant help but smile a little as I watch this.

@lachlanraidal5100 4 года назад

10:47 "Leaving aside... intentional knob fiddling, for now" Bro it's November, I'm on a hair trigger here!

@Paperknifesaint 4 года назад

Or 4, there are multiple different combinations to create the right conditions for different types of life. We just happen to be in a universe suitable for our kind of life.

@altrag 4 года назад

While there likely are other potential conditions that could lead to life, the number of conditions that wouldn't lead to life are vastly greater. Especially the "doesn't even let atoms form" kind. For example if 1.1x the existing cosmological constant prevents planets and galaxies and whatnot from forming, then there would necessarily be no life (discounting scifi style pure-energy lifeforms.) But that also means 1.2x, and 1.3x and 993848392x would also all be no-life universes. Kind of like how while there is an infinite amount of prime numbers (and that's a lot!) there are many, many, many more _total_ numbers (unless you're a mathematician..)

@Thorgue 4 года назад

4:02 As a non physicist interested in stuff I barely understand, this show rocks.

@bitantony8996 Год назад

1:26 - the master dial is set to 42

@bitantony8996 Год назад

That's a verifiable scientific fact

@DaremoTen 4 года назад

I reject all three of those postulates. This is the life you get with these settings. Without these setting you don't get this kind of life. This in no way implies that there must be other universes any more than a particle moving in one direction implies that it must move in every other direction.

@MetalMasterdom 4 года назад

You could also go so far as to say that life need not exist in any form with these settings(or any other). It just so happens that it does. But it doesn't necessarily say anything about why it does. Or why the settings are the way they are. They just are, and it just does. Does it mean anything? Maybe. Maybe not. Who's to say the settings could even be different. Maybe they can. Maybe they can't. Seems a little presumptuous to say they even can. Why? How? Oh yeah...God or a simulation. Like either answers any questions.

@knyghtryder3599 4 года назад

@@MetalMasterdom perfect exactly correct

@hxhdfjifzirstc894 4 года назад

They must invent a theory to explain the fine tuning in a way that allows them to deny the likelihood that God created the universe. Hence multiverse BS. Grasping.

@Elrog3 4 года назад

God is BS too.

@MetalMasterdom 4 года назад

@@hxhdfjifzirstc894 God is no less a stretch of the imagination as the multiverse. It can even be argued that the existence of God is even more of a fantasy. All that aside, most scientists will admit that the existence of God is a valid hypothesis. Some will even say they believe God does exist. My questions to you would be, how does the existence of a creator preclude said creator from creating more than one universe? Seems as though it should easily be possible to do so given omnipotence. Why would/should God create just one universe?

@FerdinandCesarano 4 года назад

2:06 - There is, of course, another possibility: that a universe with differently-tuned parameters would produce life that has evolved to exist in those conditions, just as our universe has produced life that can exist in these conditions. The assumption that life in all its possible forms equates to the kind of life that we know of in our experience, this assumption amounts to a profound error. It is an error that trips us up when we try to consider where life could exist in our universe with the laws of physics we know, and when we rule out certain places because we consider the conditions too extreme. And this error certainly comes into play if we try to imagine different laws of physics, and then blithely assume that constants tuned differently would make life impossible (as exemplified by this video).

@nashleydias1597 4 года назад

You are brilliant

@Polyvalent 4 года назад

I noticed this aswell. Our understanding of consciousness seems a little too elementary to start making assumptions about life in our universe or other universes.

@nate7790 4 года назад

I couldn't agree more. A differently tuned universe would probably mean impossibility of life AS WE KNOW IT. It wouldn't necessarily mean "impossibilitiy of life at all". There are many organisms even on this planet that exist in places where conditions are great for them but that wouldn't be able to thrive elsewhere. Ultimately who knows, depending on how we define life there may be life somewhere that is not carbon-based, doesn't require liquid water, or any other characteristics that may seem unimaginable to most or any of us.

@sycamorph 4 года назад

I'm pretty sure that a universe that's just a void with separated atoms that can't bind together into molecules, for example, wouldn't be able to produce anything we'd call "life" or even anything slightly complex. But maybe we (or I at least) just don't know.

@danilooliveira6580 4 года назад

if there are infinite ways to tune a universe, then there are infinite configuration that can create life in a way or another. but if if there are infinite ways to tune a universe, that means there are infinite configurations where the universe is just a void, with no chemistry, or even time and entropy, or where it has chemistry, but its too unstable for life or too stable for life. it would be too unlikely that every configuration can create a life in a different form, however, that doesn't mean there are not different configurations that can create different forms of what we could call life.

@Stinkin_Joe 2 года назад

This whole notion of luck re: universal constants, kind of escapes me. It seems a little like a puddle of water exclaiming it's luck at being a perfect fit for the pot hole it finds itself in.

@robertrosenthal7264 4 года назад

As the water conforms to the shape of the container, if the container can even hold the water, is like the idea that any life that exists within a universe will always be of a type can exist within that universe. Of course it can also be likened to a winning lottery ticket. Just because one specific ticket wins, that doesn't mean it was destined to win or specifically chosen for you to win.

@andimcgaw 4 года назад

If the multiverse exist then terms like "rare & few" is redundant

@default632 4 года назад

Yes, infinite life is possible

@therealswinery5416 4 года назад

That is, assuming this Multiverse is infinite.

@andimcgaw 4 года назад

Thereal Swinery The multiverse by definition would be infinite

@therealswinery5416 4 года назад

@@andimcgaw I think you're mistaken, actually. If this Universe is finite, which it is, since it's expanding, then the variation of the Universe's properties (namely constants) that creates the multiverse must be finite, too. There can't be infinite versions of a finite thing, now can there? When you roll a d20, there aren't infinite possibilities as to which side it will land on. There are twenty. The same goes for the Universe, and although the numbers involved will be immeasurably higher, they'll remain finite because the Universe is finite.

@andimcgaw 4 года назад

Thereal Swinery Wow there are so many things wrong with what you wrote it’s terrifying

@TheMagicalTaco 4 года назад

When you watch to the very end of a space time episode for the first time and hear their "outro" music

@michaelmeyers4843 4 года назад

Here's what I call the Supreme Anthropic Principle: There's a parallel universe out there somewhere for each of us where we have the perfect life. In a multiverse where every outcome is possible, somewhere, there must be *some* universe that exists where I succeed at everything I do, achieve every goal I have, and essentially live the perfect life, one where I happen to accomplish everything I ever dreamed of doing. Well, at least for that parallel version of me, it's the Supreme Anthropic Principle. It's nice to think that somewhere out there, there could be a me that actually lives a self-fulfilled life.

@commandercaptain4664 4 года назад

That's a slippery slope. If you believe in only two possibilities of any instance or outcome, then there must be an infinite myriad of such instances or outcomes, each affected by other infinite instances and outcomes to justify the initial ones, to the point where it all loops back to the original notion of one "true" possible instance or outcome. And who is to determine which is true, you or your other "yous"?

@DeanRendar 4 года назад

electronics that mine you for emotion, aspirations, and dreams is probably the tying together of all the multiverses to this existence where they've convinced us were just powerless nobodies.

@DidivsIvlianvs 4 года назад

"That which I cannot create I do not understand." - Richard Feynman (One of his best quotes IMO)

@fkasample1543 4 года назад

It's a bit Taoist: There was no choice but to exist. There was no chance of the contrary.

@silverhawkroman 4 года назад

that sucks, cuz we're perceptually doomed to live life forever. cuz if we're dead, time skips to a moment where we are alive again to perceive it, consciously or not.

@rujulmanjarley5911 4 года назад

on how many counts ?

@fkasample1543 4 года назад

@@silverhawkroman I think that's a bit of a wild leap. Even in a multiverse inevitably, we eventually die; the branch ends.

@scottfraser1973 4 года назад

It was stated there are 3 possibilities for a fine tuned universe: 1) we got lucky; 2) someone fiddled with the dials; 3) there are lots of universes. Forgive me for not reading the 4,000 comments, but it seems to me there is a 4th option: 4) the 20-odd free parameters aren't "free" at all, but are connected in such a way that they are inevitable. Obviously at this point we can't say if option 4 is true or false, but it wasn't even mentioned.

@gregg3692 4 года назад

The last line in this video hit hard and dead center of our galactic responsibility not just our need to change here on earth, but to change as a whole.