Physicists Proved the Universe Doesn't Exist 

You were already asleep if you believed in this illusion 😂

Glad to hear I’m not the only one who watches this stuff going to sleep in bed lol

@@TheLosrodri there’s 190k views and 500 comments. Literally everyone is watching this in bed 😂😂

❤IT'S REAL..NO ONE CAN DENAY THAT..NOW WE HAVE MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN EVER..THEY ALSO..BEEN TAKING ABOUT HAVE THERE IX A RELACION WITH GOD.😮😊❤😢😅

Right ✅

17:05 … beats me. The narrator even says it out loud… ‘fun fact’: stating 300.000 m/s - meters per SECOND - right underneath being the correct (rounded) metric number.

Well he said labarnith for labyrinth and says temperature as tempchure

You're all wrong. There is no speed of light, since light is not particles. Light is an illumination of the aether.

​@@user-wm1xm5gm2k Photon is considered as a particle and moves at light speed.

It even showed mps but he said mph

Most physicists don't do LSD.

​@@bobbybob3865they should ! 🌈🤡

I've always thought they should do DMT@@bobbybob3865

​@@bobbybob3865 But LSD do physicists.... in😅

Maybe not the same conclusin,but a similar one for sure

It was narrated by yee haw! :P

You cauth that too

The 299,792,458 metres per second is correct.

it's been covered no worries@@rayraylalonde

I noticed the mistake too but I doubted myself and thought I was wrong.

Is that a quote from something? Looks like something written by the same guy who came up with the gem "Whether you're rich or poor, our graves are the same size" People have plenty to say about things that don't exist all the time. It's called fantasy.

@@kencastleberry5126 Fantasy still exist as a thought, and as art in many cases. Also by saying that fantasy doesn't exist you are proving the point of original post.

@Wiseman108 I didn't say fantasy doesn't exist I said fantasy concerns itself with things that don't exist. Keep up please.

@@kencastleberry5126 My point is that it does exist within the context of fantasy. Keep up please.

​@@Wiseman108i understand your perspective.

Did you think it was just a made up job? 😂

Yesterday upon the stair I met a man who wasn't there. He wasn't there again today. I just wish he'd go away.

i know that you are not there to write this while i don't exist..

What we call 'reality' is a trick of our senses. We say that something exists, and is 'real' (for us) if we can see it, hear it, smell it, feel it or taste it. Things we can't detect with our senses, we say they don't exist. But this is not necessarily true. There may be, could be, should be, must be, a great number of 'things' out there that go undetectable to our senses 🙄🤔

I assumed they were theoretical as the name implies

Yes.

Fantastic question! LOL THANKS! Needed that laugh this morning. 😂

hope so.

Seems so

Then why do we still have to pay taxes?

Very well put

But that is the "assumption" made: that the universe is "objective". Assuming that it can exist without any consciousness to be "aware" of it, and maybe even that "creates" it. But that (objective) "assumption" cannot be made for sure. The double slit experiment is the most repeated experiment there ever was, and of all the various ways that it can be set up, the observed results have never changed. Entanglement, Superposition, and Retrocausality, has an inescapable conclusion, although they have tried to get around it with various mathematical gymnastics, that Space Time does not actually exist in the way that the "conscious mind" conceptualizes it. (that the "conscious mind" in some way creates that illusion) And according to Jung the "conceptualized self" often referred to as the ego, also does not exist. (it is an illusion, or a false self) That the "reality" of self and the Universe cannot be conceptualized at all. That the "real Self" and perceived / conceptualized reality of any kind emerges from the Jungian "individual unconscious" and the "collective unconscious." The part of, or the nature of, "consciousness" that we are not even "consciously aware" of.

My "version" of the Universe dies with me

We are the Universe.

@@chrisstevens-xq2vb But the mystery for the physicists is: What are the "processes" by which that happens, and that is before they even address the issue of: What are the "causes". And they think if they have enough confusing detail on the processes, that maybe the causes can be ignored. But since "consciousness" (whatever that might be) is required to understand the "processes", and itself might be the "primary cause". In other words there cannot be "experiences" without it, and maybe also there cannot be anything "to experience" without it, so that could cause a little bit of an "empirical" quandary.

He probably just pulls info from the web and other videos and regurgitates it for profit.

I was reflecting on entanglement as well…

Ha! You actually articulated this in a way that I can understand. This even cleared up Schroedingers cat. I don't feel like looking up the spelling of his name but I'm sure you know who he is. I couldn't fully grasp the concept. Not even through this program. I'm glad I decided to click on the comments Thank you

What is a subatomic tree!

@@StephenBingham-kp2ldsame 😫

And if we knew ' everything ', what would be of concern next.? 😊

No, we only know one thing.

It is the only thing we are allowed to know.

How much do you think a cell knows? Only what it needs too to grow.

The reality is that they we are educated just enough to believe what we have been taught and not educated enough to question what we have been taught. 😟

no.

Me and the universe are homies bro

We are part of the universe

It's 186,000 miles per second.

It does

Thanks for the correction. I was being a little facetious.@@redbirdauto1713

Thanks. I guess it was a little too much dry humor.@@shawnn6541

🤠

The bottom line is, ENERGY. Our senses perceive the energy in many ways. Colour is merely a wave-length of magnetism. All our senses are deceiving our brain..!! The table you looked at was energy.... Our brain is energy... Our thinking is energy... All an illusion, hence the hologram theory..!!

What spoon Neo? There is no spoon. Only in your mind.

I know, what a load of nonsense.

You’re still observing it

if you see a table in a video game then you leave the area does the table exist? no because tables exist as rendered objects and when you leave that area of the game you are no longer rendering stuff that used to be there. howeve, something always remains without perception. the founders of QM called it consciousness, modern physicist prefer the term “information” regardless there exist a world outside of your perception but that world is not physical, “rendered” as the rendered world is something that only occurs in ones observation

No, perception doesn’t determine reality. If I perceive you as a chicken nugget are you?

👍

If there was no creature to perceive reality, then reality doesn't exist, because existence is one of our attributes. Perception is everything. You can't force "perception" so your argument is actually wrong, i think you mean "will" him into a chicken nugget, because you don't know English or the definition of perception xd. @@chrisstevens-xq2vb

I mean "Doesn't not" explains it all.@@chrisstevens-xq2vb

don't insult moths they are my only friends

"If one can think of it, it exists." Not to be rude, but did you read this somewhere? This is exactly the same conclusion I arrived at, decades ago, when I was thinking about another, unrelated subject. The colleagues around my desk were not impressed. The reasoning is also backwards, "you cannot think of something if it cannot exist", which how it started off my train of thought, way back then.

Try that on physical laws and mathematics. Dumb ideas. Keep trying though.

I'm still waiting for them to be able to get us cell phone to work in my basement before I believe they're running remote controls on other planets... And like when they launch the Vikings explorers the technology wasn't good enough to still be sending his pictures and if space is a vacuum you can't have thrust

Do you mean too stoned to comprehend? 😂

Great show that.

Everything is physics. Physical systems slowly breaking down Gravity affects time and these physics Because time is different in different gravity, the clocks will be off when returning to “normal time” The corrections the international space station makes are incredibly small, but they are made

Try telling that to “climate change” believers...

Correct.

Id almost have no doubt the (most) galaxies moving toward ea other. Say andromeda and milky way…..the speed in which they are approaching is much higher than the speed of rotation. Sooo rotation vs light shift would be negligible to our perception. No?

@@bruss4580 "Expanding universe" means most galaxies are moving away from each other. That was Edwin Hubble's great discovery in 1929. Andromeda is approaching the Milky Way at about 110 kilometers per second, and its rotational velocity has a maximum of 225 kilometers per second (at a radius of 1300 light years from the center).

Gravity is an electric force. Electric forces manifest in different ways. Consider electromagnetism and electrostatic force. Both electric like gravity but vary greatly in strength

Gravity is an electric force. Κοιτα κυριε τι μαθαινει ο ανθρωπος. Thanks!

Gravity is truely the greatest magic of all. It holds every drop of water in the oceans from leveling out while allowing it to go on hollidays moving freely about the planet. Wont let it fall but allows it to form waves and swells. Its the weakest force but most dominant of all. Amazin ! BRAVO !

0

You're all playing with words trying to change what they were meaning. When they ever speak of gravity they never mention the planets and their "electromagnetic force" they in fact never mention the planets having an electric charge. Wish they did but thankfully a few scientists in the mainstream are finding the courage to change the conversation.

I was 3 minutes late for work and got sacked, so time matters to some.

At first i was skeptical when scientist told us the universe wasn't real, but now there's at least 2 of them, i'm even more skeptical...

you mean less skeptical@@rogerdiogo6893

God is such a sinister joker…..

You don't know?? Wow 😂

A deaf dog still barks

sound is just our brain's interpretation of shockwaves of air displacement. so when a tree falls, there will always be air displacement. it never makes 'sound' because 'sound' only exists in our mind. when someone's there to 'hear it', it just means someone interprets the air displacement of a tree falling and calls it 'the sound of a tree falling'

Yep gotta observe it. Before its observed its just like a probability that a bear shits in the woods.

No, that's not it and also all the answers you got are just... bad. Mainly the @guiseppe36749 who thinks they sound smart but basically said nothing. They said "sound is just our brain's interpretation of shockwaves of air displacement. so when a tree falls, there will always be air displacement. it never makes 'sound'"... WUT... thanks for nothing... Yeah "Sound" is word for Air displacement so they are equal therefore IT DOES MAKE SOUND.It's just nonsense equivocation on "sound" trying to differentiate between the fact and what "word" we use to describe that fact to be able to communicate about it between each other - unless you define "sound" as "observed sound wave" and then OFC yes, but at that moment it's definitional and nothing can make sound unless observed, obviously. Ergo they said literally nothing of any value. @thewinesmith is also wrong, it's not probability of making sound, when the tree fell down it did make a sound regardless If someone was there or not to observe it. The macro world is still predictable, this result of violation of bell's inequality has outcome for quantum world (there are different worlds with different rules). Just like for a bug the gravity is negligible, surfice tention is what matters = different rules. So hopefully we now understand that what violation of bell's inequality changes is "our understanding of quantum mechanics", it has little to no effect of our understanding of reality "in different frame" (table is still table, tree that fell without no one around still made waves (sound) that no one observed). The change that happen was, there were 2 theories of how quantum world works, it could have been deterministic "with hidden variables" or "non-deterministic", the violation of bell's inequality shows that it is non-deterministic and therefore they only way for us to describe quantum behaviour is using "probability" because results of measurement cannot be determined. That is to say, If you take 2 boxes and you put left shoe in 1st and right shoe in 2nd and you send this box to your friend once she opens the box "she knows what's in your box", now nothing changed about your box, what changed is her beeing able to determine an information about it. This does not apply for quantum entanglement for pre-detrmined quantum states - that's what bell inequality is about, it's a upper bound of quantum entaglement "parallel measurement" correlation instead of orthogonal (notice, parallel is important, for example if you messaure vertical motion on one side the horizontal motion on other side there is no correlation between meassurements, however If you meassure both vertically they are maximally correlated - and if your meassurements go into diagonals that's what we are talking about here). So if you meassure parallel you can tell how strongly they are correlated until the "upper bound" (=bell inequality). What many meassurements shown is that it can be violated and therefore is not "local" ergo not determined. And that's all it says, that quantum mechanics seems to be not determined and non-local. It has little to no implications on your normal life whatsoever and falling tree still makes the sound even If nobody "observes it" because such a statement equivocates on "observer" which in case of that tree are air particles reacting to particles of falling tree, ergo "observe" their movement - all this still happen regardless of our observation. I tried... but it's a bit complicated to put it in words like this, I suggest to find video that explains it with visual help :)

You are probably right@@thewinesmith

Yeah, that bugged me!

Causality. I guess they missed that slip up.

@@jakubhladik5898 They slipped at 17:17 saying light travels 186 thousand miles an hour. Should be 186 000 miles/second.

I agree. And that would explain why photons do not experience time.

It's all relative. If we race our spaceships at light speed to Andromeda our dashboard clocks keep ticking, we keep growing older. I don't know some of this stuff is ridiculous. You can't stop time. The universe is not a holograph and the future is not preordained.

@@danbreilin9169If we were traveling at the speed of light I suspect that even though the clocks keep ticking what would happen is that we would arrive at our destination instantly without any travel time at all in our own perception. No time would pass for the passengers on our ship. All the while time would have continued on in the outside world at its normal pace.

@@johnrule1607 No, it takes 8 minutes for sunlight to reach earth. Imagine if you're a photon at the surface of the Sun and we communicate instantaneously and I tell you to leave right now head towards the earth, how long is it going to take you to get here? It's not instantaneous so time must elapse

@@danbreilin9169 It's not instantaneous for an external observer, as from the Earth. But it IS instantaneous for the photon. The photon experiences no elapsed time.

"movement" is a change of position relative to another object. If you move your little finger, it has moved relative to the other fingers, relative to your body, and relative to the bed you are sitting on. If you move two fingers are the same time and in the same fashion, both your fingers have moved relative to your arm, and relative to your body and to the bed you are sitting on. But both fingers have been completely stationary relative to each other, no movement at all.

Of course it does. You don't need to initiate your own movement to be considered to move. Whether your muscles generate the motion or an outside force interacts with you, you'll be moving. I.e. if you get rear ended, you'll move

"Movement" is relative, and is always defined "with respect to another object". In our universe there are objects moving in all possible directions, from large galaxies to small pebbles flying about space, and according to relativity all objects are linked together. Because no object can travel at the speed of light. Which means if an object travels at half the speed of light, there can be no other object in the whole universe that can travel at half the speed of light in the opposite direction.

@sharesgames9546 right except for that last part. You're saying that only one object in the universe can travel at C÷2 at any given time. That's not accurate

@@shawncarter7188 I said that if object A is moving at half speed of light with respect to another object B, there cannot be an object C that travels at half the speed of light in the opposite direction of A. This constraint links A, B and C together, regardless of distance, or size. As there are so many objects in the universe, this constraint would seem to imply that the maximum achievable speed is 1/2 the speed of light, because if you try and go any faster there will surely be some other object, no matter how far away, that travels faster than light with respect to you.

Rt it ain't real at all though that's the thing. It's all about the Christ 👍🧙‍♂️ and in December, Christmas ☮️

Because 'WE' created our own selves from the time our brains developed while in mother's womb, and up to now, using the senses... a false world, a false universe, etc etc... As some commented: 'A DREAM FOR OURSELVES'...!!

Light needs something to be "absorbed" by in order to be seen. I believe the light would travel through the "Void" but would not be observed until it reaches something that it can reflect on.

@@BaronoftheDead There is no void. The fabric of space is everywhere in the universe

@@rd4908 That's why I put quotes around "Void." I wanted it to retain the context the OP meant.

I you don't pay your leccy bill then there's no light

It's about mocking the American standards of measurement, so since they usually use METRIC they mindlessly did the conversion so came up with 300 mi/sec

To your last statement . Seth is wrong . The Universe does exist . It has space and physical things , And Life .

Sounds good to me 👍🏽

We will all be the same again not a shame

"Man, I don't know what the fok you just little kid, but you special man. You reached out, and you touched a brother heart."~ Tracy Morgan/Pumkin Escobar ~ Jay & Slilent Bob srike back. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😈

Have you heard the theory that the universe is actually someone's brain. And we exist inside that brain. Universe and brain seem very similar. Imagine using 100% brain power. Who's to say that can't be it.

@@robertwieczorek5838 Yes. That's the Bultzmann Brain thought experiment. That's not physics. It's philosophy, particularly a metaphysical discussion. The problem with 'who's to say?' discussions is that you end up with any number of untestable hypotheses purporting to explain the same thing. The Bulzmann Brain just happened to get more famous than the rest as being kind of the first one to be widely discussed. It's no more likely than any other such supposition.

…but only in a Hoover.

Scientists that don't really know what is happening use time to try and explain things, which is just gobbledygook

memory is all we have, ask Alzhei. . .. . . . . . ... .. . . .

It's obvious we're part of something bigger...... which might be the universe ? Even a down syndrome patient could come to such a conclusion.

Nope

I would respond to that, but I don't exist so I can't.

ok so I have put some thought in to this and have also talked to others, the ones that think this way about our existence have no skills and little experience in working with things. they can't see in their minds what people talk about. things like "it is becoming hard to steer the car" in your mind you would see a power steering fluid holder or if you are a mechanic you might see a power steering mechanism. this is how my mind works. work does not scare me but concerns I do have. I am always concerned with quality! on my stuff it is ok to tweak with stuff but when you are dealing with work you are dealing with people. so if life is a simulation then what if I chose to believe this theory then i can do a crappy job and as soon as i leave everything will fix itself, right? so I can basically sit there and do nothing because a simulation has default rules and everything is written in stone, yes? well I am having a non existing lunch.

@@maxtek73 Nothing would fix itself, according to that theory. But I don't really know what you're trying to say.

@@Daniel_P116idk either lol. All i know is that we humans do not know what anything is and scientists are making theories that isnt real. We Might get clearance when we die

Time is God’s way of keeping everything from happening all at once.

he said elon musk is a scientist. anything goes, man. BTW I'm a firetruck.

Since Hawkin passed even he now knows the truth and will bow his knee like all others will giving glory to the Father of all creatures and things.

Hey, I’m special, too, right? Isn’t everyone supposed to get a prize? ... That’s better…!-> Oooo, 4 moi?! U shouldn’t have! …OK, I’m good now. Carry on.

Touché. Some people perceive governments as honest🥴

To bad you are wrong OP. See Donald Hoffman for a better explanation of the following statements but as it stands all forms of life perceive reality totally different. To believe Humans have the only true real reality is absurd. It is 100% a hallucination and psychology could have told you this over 100 years ago.

@@chrisstevens-xq2vb I perceive governments as an obligated tax payer (and wasting my money)...🤬

Literally every thing is permanent.

That's right. Everything IS an illusion Read David Ickes latest book The Dream

instead of saying god exists lol clown show everyday

​@stuart6478 but God doesn't exist because YHWH is purely Jewish fiction. If their God exists, then so does every other God. Surprise surprise, none of them are real.

​@@stuart6478😂👍

@@stuart6478 they can't, because their agenda dictates they either convolute theories where *we* are God, or there is no God

@KevinSayes Without having heard the quote you’re referring to, I think you got that entire concept completely backward. If there are levels of simulations, every single one of them had a period where they weren’t able to simulate worlds yet. In other words, 100% of the simulated worlds experienced periods where they were not able to create their own simulations. The statistics dictate that we are *least* likely to be in the original world.

Maybe this helps. Idk. 🤷🏼‍♀️ science.nasa.gov/ems/07_infraredwaves

The only video I listened to every word (watching most of it) and jus realized it's almost over lmao literally the only video ever thats over 30-45 mins tops that i actually sat through the entire video which is crazy

It’s possible this is a computer generated voice. If you capture enough samples of someone, you can create something that fools us into thinking it’s real.

This was actually a computer generated voice made from a sampled voice and then the transcript was converted using text to speech. If listening to it carefully there are several points when the synthesized voice made GIANT errors in the correct pronunciation of certain words. This ‘screams’ of ‘text to speech’ synthesis as systems like this can occasionally make these kinds of errors AND ALSO will not catch common sense typos in the transcript like a human would catch because the human would easily catch the contextual error in the sentence the moment the wrong word was used. For example at 24 seconds into the video the synthesized voice says ‘laberNinth of time’ instead of the correct word ‘labyrinth’. Another example during the narration at the 28 minute and 20 second mark in this video, the narrating synthesized voice says the word “casualty” instead of the word “causality”. This renders the sentence meaningless as it doesn’t make sense with the incorrect word (“casualty”). No human would make that mistake and not catch the stupidity of the sentence they just said… This video was a narration from a very good text to speech engine with a unique Midwest American accented voice.

Well if the universe is a hologram or simulation, your theory is wrong

Prove it.

@@IBADSNU Prove what exactly?

@@IBADSNU Would you like me to prove the earth is round? Or the moon exists even if you don't look at it? Are you asking about time dilation? Such as, no two watches are ever truly in sync. Are you asking about how decoherence works? What's your conundrum?

Nope

We use mathematics to determine how fast things are moving away from the "epicenter" of the Universe. We measure everything around us and the direction they move. Once we have that number we use it to calculate how long it could have taken to travel that distance and create a timeline with this data. It's similar to "How far does a car travel moving at 60mph if it's moving at 60mph?"

@@aadd2935 It is a fun problem to look at lol. Trying to calculate objects paths through space based on their interactions with each other is kind of interesting. I'm not sure how useful it would be to apply to the "Big Bang"; I honestly haven't studied it much. (I'm not a mathematician lol) An object 20 light years away could have affected an object's path before being flung away on its journey and that's too much information needed. Our best approximation is good enough for me. The Universe is chaos haha We would have to be present during the Big Bang to truly know.

The big bang is a theroy... widely accepted but not proven

​@@BaronoftheDeadwhere is the "epicenter" of the universe?

Maybe you just think you like them

You like therefor you are.

Yes.. Perfect.. I like to say that the universe is energy, our brains are energy.. and the thinking is energy... Our thinking deceives us to think that we exist.

The problem with all this is most folks forget it's simply a concept, start preaching it like it's some new gospel truth, then wonder why folks look at them like they got a squirrels arse for a head when they get bent outta of shape when folks with a brain laugh at their concepts.

Brain no good for stringy theory...only make fire

Eek

Right on the money. Unfortunately, it has only one small flaw. It doesn't explain why the earth is flat, and NASA continues to release propaganda images depicting the earth as a sphere. Do they think we are all stupid or something 😀

Agreed 200% Western thinkers still catching up 😅

Because it’s based on consciousness, the observer, not the observed, as the source of reality

I wish they'd ctrl+z you.