Roger Penrose - Did the Universe Begin? 

Which is exactly what Einstein described as good science; going to the outer reaches of what's known, then extending it a touch further (paraphrasing)

concur

His "aeon" theory is nothing more than the very ancient "turtles all the way down" phenomenon. It's not science. It's laughable on its face. What is driving these processes? How did they come into being? Did they pop out of nothing? Have they been going on "forever"? It's all utter nonsense.

Yup, as is the conecept of an end or any measurable point in between.

indubitably

exactly. It is the concept of time that seems to confound all these explanations. If science could explain the concept of time I think that would be awesome

its terrible - i couldn't😮 watch - just had to listen

I got a minute into the video n had to stop. Only here to search for other comments that noticed to 😂😂

Hmmm. Did not notice it until you pointed it out. Interesting.

@@KamramBehzad maybe it's an age specific thing. I'm old.

Incredibly distracting, I had to stop as well

Really? I feel like a WWII prisoner of war in Germany, lined up against a wall and machine gunned with infinity declarations to explain everything. All of his collapses of logic come from that use. For example, nothing means no mass and no energy and no other particle existence, so how does nothing become something? This proposes for example that nothing is unstable. Then he adds that existence is unstable. Well okay, make something from nothing in a lab and then turn it back into nothing if this is the case. Second, cycling existence does not answer how the first existence from nothing got here. Einsteins relativity says a particle in motion is energy, and so it would have a frequency, but a mass at rest doesn't. So his equivalences were false. Lastly, how motion exists is not explained by such a model. Motion relates to time, not mass. We grab masses to study motion to get units of time, but time is motion, not mass.

Please don't write about science again. What the hell? !!! 😂😂 All what you just said is that we are looking into the past.

@@amraly9640 not exactly... you have to use your own understanding more often... what I'm saying is that watching a video of your own birthday party, says nothing about how you were born and what caused you to sing your favorite song... that's all...

@NafeDev-yo4lo that's exactly the point...

How does it go?

Exactly. Or to elaborate. Nothing can emerge from nothing because nothing has nothing to act upon. We exist therefore existence is the default state. What is always was and always will be in one form or another.

We only wish that was the case. In truth science knows with a pretty big certainty that we come from nothing and that we’re a cosmic throw of the dice that never should have happened. Before the Big Bang the universe was nothing - a field of quantum possibilities never to come into manifestation as they don’t have anything to interact with - all of them all in superpositions all at once. However since it is a field of infinite possibilities one of those is that two particles could collide in a superposition. That is the Big Bang, matter manifested. We’re born from the eternal abyss and we’re heading straight back to it as the universe cools down and collapses onto itself. Just an eternal void with nothing ever happening ever again.

​@NafeDev-yo4loyou could say the energy is eternal... possibly. Not the matter. We can trace back the creation of the elements that make up your body

The universe is a creation and hence only exists if the forces holding it in place continue. That is a thought. It is not reality the place where we exist always.

@@user-hu6rr1gc7u the universe being created is a baseless assertion. Cheers

'First Cause' seems to me a problem for a child's mind.

Read a littke pholosophy, if you have an open mind. Otherwise, gfoodbye.@@Bobalicious

@@Bobalicious and yet great philosophers have debated that question, and thought deeply upon it, despite no longer being adequately equipped with a child's mind.

So far … we may one day discover it

The alternative is a universe with a infinite past.

You are so right! Perhaps the answer lies in the concepts like infinity and eternity (which is infinity in the context of time). We just can't comprehend infinity. For our minds, it is just a mathematical, theoretical concept.

“It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.” - Alexander Vilenkin I agree with you, but according to the scientific data we have (as Vilenkin said), the universe has not been here forever, it had a beginning and will most probably have an end. We know that something cannot come into existence without a cause, right? Nothing produces nothing. So, something else, something different than the universe must have caused it into existence and that entity must itself be eternal, without beginning and end, as you stated.

Wish you weren't here.

Thank you for providing the correct answer.

12 years ago, all videos are very old.

I’m always amazed that even nonbelievers refer to a creator, and not the potential for creators…… thus polytheism. It’s just as plausible as monotheism

Maxwell was a smart cookie. VERY smart

I see it as a fractal.

He explained it in reference to equations that justify it. No mass, no ‘time’, size is irrelevant……funky stuff happens

@@mavelous1763 That makes sense now actually. Since space and time are linked, if there is no time then there is no space.

Your question presumes "there was once nothing" which I assume comes from your religious upbringing. There is no evidence that there was once nothing and then something. As it were, something (rather than nothing) is likely the natural state of the universe.

​@@brianwilson7624Your assumption about my question is totally wrong. I don't believe that there was ever a state of absolute nothingness. On the other hand, to claim that a system expands to total dissipation spare photons and later reassemble (re-emerge) forces, hence raw materials, as postulated in CCC, describes an unstable system that is subject to obliteration. Such a system could hardly have existed eternally. An eternally existing system will be methodically unyielding and perfectly stable.

​@@brianwilson7624what do you assume immediately that because he is asking a legitimate question that he has a religious upbringing? Do you know him personally? If not, it appears you are making assumptions and discriminating against these kinds of questions based on your anti religious personal views

The indeterminate as I guess was known to to the Platonists

Renting a house with an address, but no rooms

@@DarkSkayohhhh! That’s a good one.

Exactly. This theory it's a postulate evading the real debate.

@NafeDev-yo4lo but if the universe is infinite then there are infinite combinations.

​@NafeDev-yo4lobut if the universe is infinite then there are infinite combinations.

@NafeDev-yo4lo A person would have to be immortal/infinite to do that.

@NafeDev-yo4lo why would you even feel any inclination to suppose a genuine contributor to the state of new universes might be randomness in any true sense. Can you think of a single example of true randomness arising in this universe? It seems to me that that’s the one characteristic these universes can’t contain.

Lmfao!

Cycles of eons cold be : B (bubble)^0 ( singularity)> B^1( time born)- boundary S^0(string)>B^2-S1(disc)> B^3-S^2(2-D sphere)>B^4-S^3( 3-D sphere)>B^0. We live on 3-D sphere X^2+Y^2+Z^2+t^2=1

@@nyckhusan2634 made up words made up numbers

Infinite dimensions? They can’t even prove more than 4, thus string theory problems

Infinite time and space allow for patterns to develop, even against the probability of randomness.

I think entropy gets reset in the conformal mapping that connects the eons. When you emerge from one semi-infinite into the start of another semi-infinite period, the mapping interprets the infinitely dissorderly state of the previous eon into a refeference state for the current eon. That is how I understand it.

​@@skwalka6372Aeon!

@@wthomas5697it’s definitely not infinite

Basically the "Law of truly large numbers". Entropy does increase and decrease all the time. A large decrease is simply not very likely. But if you wait long enough even the most unlikely scenario will eventually happen, as long as its not entirely impossible.

I’ve seen the turtle

A'Tuin

I like turtles 🐢

😂😂

Turtles are good people.

cause on my love, you can depennnnnnnnnnnnnddd

One ancient philosophical idea was that the universe was like a ‘giant ‘ cell that oscillated over eons of time from a small size .. expanding until all the energy was at the peripheral then contracting.. all the energy gradually moving to the centre again .. like a magnet whose centre alternates between positive and negative states …

😂

Not quite . I don’t see any of penroses work having any of the impact Einstein has had

That’s exactly right. And ironically the materialist can’t actually justify the external world. Nor can they justify logic, numbers, etc Oh but they’re happy to use them

There is something before it’s not understood fully yet

@@zacatkinson3926 “before” doesn’t make sense with relativity. But I don’t claim relativity is true. What makes you think there’s a “before”?

No need to 'justify' an external world,@@deanodebo If one exists, 'material' science is the way to understand it. If one does not exist, the materialist is in precisely the same untenable position as everyone else.

@@AppealToTheStoned fair enough. What are numbers made of? Let’s take 3. What is 3 made of, and where is it?

Oh. That’s interesting. Self preservation in an infinite universe.

I believe our universe is a leaf growing on a branch, of a tree, in a forest, on a planet, in universe2, that is a leaf growing on a branch .... That's why I'm fascinated by watching fractal images zoom in and in and in ...

So infinite?

Some ‘forevers’ are longer than others….just like infinities

Good. if you inherit 1,000,000 USD, we just lop off the zeros as these are not natural and you just get 1 USD.

Yes ,those you cannot imagine too.

It's pretty insane that no one in the fcking univers know how everything started or what's.happening. We just live without knowing and this explains really well the need for religions to cope with existence. For me the very fact that we must live without knowing is so frustrating but there is nothing better we could do.

@@huseyinbarkay5854 totally agree with that. We believe in god for two reasons: 1) the creation of everything the particles or the energy and the physic rules the govern the universe; 2) we try to give ourselves a meaning. Personally i think that we are special animals because we have consciusness, we are pretty young as a specie so there are many questions we can’t still answer but evolving in the future humanity could find some answers, but not for the foundamental questions.

@@lorenzomalaguti2250 exactly buddy. I think it just came naturally. Peopel realised there is literally no sense with the big bang, atleast no sense of rationality Human brain is literally "I see something, this thing I see must have a cause". Literally this is how it works inside and for everything. What would a human brain think, he would say well there must be something that caused it, ie God' But then what created god ? Where does he come from right ? And unfortunately the answer you get is "oh he always existed" , "he is outside of time fyi"... Well how is he achieving that then* As I said, universe is literally the biggest troll and we need atleast 7 Einstein or crazy-powered Nikola Tesla to figure out something

No, Walter passed away last year, August 23, 2013 Before the JWST started sending back images that conflict with the BigBang theory.

appreciate u doing the math brodie 💯

That's right. The universe was created by His Holiness the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Loose Canon | The Book of Solipsy | Chapter XXV p.112 78 Ye have been born, ye are alive, and ye shall die. 79 It’s the “ye are alive” part that should concern ye most at the moment. 80 Yes, the Beer Volcano and Stripper Factory of Heaven await thee, and are currently under construction, but ye shall not be so gullible as to count on what ye as yet have no evidence to support. 81 Well, that is how I wish ye would think, anyway. 82 But, since ye apparently aren’t quite there yet, if Intelligent Design is to be considered Science, then since every word of My Great Creation of the Universe is True, it shall thusly be considered Science, and thusly taught as well. 83 Proclaim I, Your Wondrous Glob in Heaven. 7 For as His Noodly Appendages Do Touch Us, so too do they touch even the smallest atoms of the universe, and re-arrange them for His Own Holy Amusement, so as to drive scientists insane. 8 And thus, if Creationism is to be taught as Science, then the Great and Holy Truth of the Creation of the Universe by His Holiness the Flying Spaghetti Monster must also be taught." -Solipsy of the First Council of Olive Garden

What is squashing it down? No mass, therefore no gravity.

Actually synthesis and analysis in mathematics is how new theorems are born. Your problem may be thinking the scientific theory is true. It’s not. They’re not. They’re models essentially.

If you ask me Penrose just struggled to explain the concept in more simple terms, so he kinda retreated into the equations. There is nothing nonsensical about his proposal. Or at least nobody found a nonsensical element within it yet. And its not even that counter-intuitive how it works. The infinity he talks about effectively comes down to the Law of truly large numbers. If you have a googol years time, even a chimpanzee randomly hitting buttons on a typewriter will eventually happen to write the Lord of the Rings. If you have a googol to the power of a googol years time, Quantum fluctuation will eventually happen to randomly create the physical novels out of nothing somewhere. And if you have a googol to the power of a googol to the power of a googol years time, that might be enough for Quantum fluctuation to create a new big bang.

@@deanodebo Well, mathematics is how new theorems may be born, but there has to be a justification for transforming the infinite expansion into a cataclysmic collapse that then causes a new Big Bang. The photons expanding out to infinity have no mass. Therefore, there is no gravity to cause the universe to collapse. So there must be some errant assumptions in Penrose's equations. One errant assumption he makes is that the cold dark (almost) nothingness of the universe an infinite number of years from now is the same as the absolute nothingness before the beginning of time.

@@gordonquimby8907 keep in mind, scientific theories are only provisional explanations, never proven But the idea is that “distance” and “time” lose all quantifiable meaning at some point. They have no meaningful magnitude. Energy and mass being equal, who knows the process where space and time are “reborn” But to speak of “collapse” is nonsensical just as anything “happening” is - Absent time and magnitude of distance.