Saul Perlmutter - Why Did Our Universe Begin? 

How is easy why is not😂.

Why is IS

@@letitsnow8518 is ...why ?

Whys are human constructions to explain our ignorance to ourselves.

@@mikemondano3624 No, are the start to overcome ignorance. Sometimes "cool" phrases makes little sense.

Well...perhaps a service to dummies. Definitely not a service to humans...wasting money on false science...when it could go to the hungry.

but not to humans.

90 seconds into this talk and i was hooked.

"Why" is not the way to start a question related to science. "Why" is the way to start a question related to religion. It will not get us closer to the truth.

You expected a definitive answer?

Read your message and moved on.. didn’t waste a minute

You are correct. So called "smart people" spewing nonsense.

Is it so? What are your thoughts about life after death? Is it heaven or hell or reincarnation?

@@unknown9288 haha..none of those silly things..

🎯.. well said.

So what caused time to begin?

@@andrewdouglas1963 the word ‘time’ doesn’t exist in the concept of the universe…so that’s why there can’t be a before…and the word ‘before’ also is a non starter…that’s just us trying to determine a human answer…

@@markme3259 I never used the word "before". It is logical that natural time began. So it's also logical that whatever caused natural time to begin is not subject to natural time. Wouldn't you agree? If not, tell me what you think could cause time to begin?

And yet, I’m always late! Seems to me they should have started time an hour or two earlier, so we wouldn’t always have to rush.

I think if that's the case, then it has to be a loop, in which case the beginning and the end meet infinite times. The universe is expanding currently, but maybe far into the future it will contract, and the big bang is the explosion after the prior version in the loop is compacted down into and infinitesimal speck.

davidhesse6593- Nope. Real infinities are impossible. Infinities are only possible with abstract things like numbers. Universe is NOT infinite.

That´s what Aristotle would have said. To me, it is equally mind bending that is is either way, finite or infinite. But it actually makes more sense to me that it is eternal, infinite...

Absolutely not. For one thing, time did not exist before the Big Bang. And time itself will end with no further events ever taking place. Nothing can ever be eternal.

@@vladimirrogozhin7797 Not going to happen. Our ape brains are tiny and have been shrinking for 100,000 years. All that is well beyond the utmost realm of human thought, or any thought, for that matter.

I agree. Date of original broadcast should be included in the description.

Yea and he looks so young. Timetravel?

This channel is not about science but about the meaning of life. Science gives no "why" science finds the "how". "Why" explores reason or intent and supposes supernatural reason or intent when brought to science. "Truth" is subjective and "fact" is objective. "Closer to Truth" does NOT mean the same thing as "Closer to Fact".

Judge by Robert's hair.

@@ZeroOskul I don't care. A scientist talks about a telescope he is building. I need the WHEN.

😂

Don't listen to these evasive people brother. Stick to the teaching of Jesus/Love. There have been plenty of wise men before us who figured it all out.

Primordial soup ? So where did that come from ?

Exactly. Smart man. @@patkelly931

What could cause time to begin? Logically whatever caused time to begin must be eternal and unaffected by natural time.

​@@andrewdouglas1963You have hit the nail on its head! Whatever was the primal cause of the universe must itself be uncaused, eternal. In vedic literature from the Indus valley civilisation, it is referred to as the Brahman (not god, not a person but just a primary entity which is the only thing that existed, exists, will exist always, ever present). The Rig Veda Nasadiya Suktha creation hymn contains philosophical musings about this topic and human beings pondered on this question thousands of years ago: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasadiya_Sukta#:~:text=The%20N%C4%81sad%C4%ABya%20S%C5%ABkta%20(after%20the,the%20origin%20of%20the%20universe.

@@user-kb8lr5ed4l You can put forward a concept of anything. Showing how it could work as a valid theory is a different matter. There are no viable models of eternal universe's. All are found to require a begining. This matches what we physically see. It strongly appears our universe had a begining.

@@user-kb8lr5ed4l I agree. There has to be a first uncaused cause from which every other cause descended.

@@user-kb8lr5ed4l I like what you say. This is very interesting. In particular that we can never prove the truth of anything; we can only prove it false. This means that scientific experiments can only disprove a hypothesis. What that means is that scientific hypotheses have an element of subjectivity. What is a reasonable hypothesis to one person might be an unreasonable hypothesis to another. For this reason, a new hypothesis needs to made carefully and with the understanding that it may be wrong. It is also interesting what you say about the synthesis of mathematical knowledge with observable physical reality.

the choices are two A) conscious first causation B) random chance starting from something we dont know why was there.

Agree. Many segments are mistitled. Why seems to refer to intent. No one has that answer.

@@francesco5581lol. Conscious causation….😂 panpsychism is a religion.

@@dr_shrinker what is more probable, the conscious causation of an house ? The unconscious causation of an house ? Or the random chance that cause an house to exist ?

We were hoping you could tell us.

Or eat enough acid

Is the universe a self reflective councessnes? How can be ? If it is just a thing. Instead of a hwo, someone? A thing ( the universe) can not have councessnes.

Why?😅

"The chain of causality" ---what a delightful turn of phrase ! However, there are many mere mortals,have realized since forever, that all that is (from atoms to the entire universe) is/are an expression of the Creative intelligent force/energy, we call/term God. Of course, many who find this concept difficult to understand/accept, postulate all sorts of mindless mechanical happenstances ! Let's describe these individuals as 'pseudo-intellectuals' shall we ? (All themselves without purpose, power or meaning by the way since they themselves are an intrinsic part of this/their nothingness What an amazing set of circumstances-- all that is from nothing, all that is from nowhere, all that is without purpose. A truly fine example of intelligent reasoning ! To use the old phrase,--- "you pay your money and take your pick". Which is your option ?

Linear thinking is always look8mg for rational answers. What if it’s all just an illusion of the mind in infinite space. No beginning or ending

@@jaylucas8352 Are you able to think 'non linearly' ? The fact that you construct your sentences in a linear fashion, suggests that you are only playing mind games !

@@user-kb8lr5ed4l You make an interesting point. However, maybe you can explain just how/why the universe exists, not to mention the power (atomic) which exists within each and every particle of matter. ??? Further, even space itself between each and every particle, planet, constellation etc etc, or why should anything exist at all ?. Since even space or that we call 'nothingness, is itself is a commodity/a dimension/a state of actual being, which is between each and particle of matter ? It is the very existence/power (within/without ) of all that is, which confirms the very being/intelligence/power of an intelligent Creative force. That we term God.

This is a philosophical video, obviously no one knows

one "is" @@nihlify

Thanks bro for saving my time

All seconds are the same size or they would be called something else.

time, when you're standing in it, no matter how its flowing, feels like time always feels. you flow with it, so to speak.

@@ModestNeophyte Time doesn't "flow". What would be moving? Time is not ours to have, to waste, to spend. It is the god sustains us moment to moment.

@@mikemondano3624 oh my god its a damn figure of speech...

@@ModestNeophyte But... you used it like it were not. You took a "figure of speech" and then extended it to a real flow carrying you with it. Usually, that only happens when the person thinks in words and the pattern of words misleads them.

I watched a video awhile back about scales on both the grand and the infinitesimal scale. They mentioned a similar thing, that an average sized human is right around dead center in size in between the observable universe and a Planck length. What was interesting about that to me was these are the largest and smallest things we can conceive of, and we are right about in the middle. So my first thought was, what about an entity much smaller or larger than us. Are they in the middle of a similarly wide scale? Can they perceive beyond us in one direction depending on if they are larger or smaller? Is there more that will forever be beyond our perception?

@@digitalfootballer9032good question. Scales could go on forever in both directions….it seems more intuitive I think.

Because size itself is an illusion (as is extension - what we perceive as lengths and distances are just energy barriers. California is only further away because it takes more energy, gas, electricity, or whatever, to get there. It is the same distance away as everything else, zero) . In 5 dimensions or higher, size has no meaning and everything will fit inside everything else.

Hmmm

Unless I mistake what you mean, you misunderstand time if you say that "time has always existed." It doesn't exist at all because it's not a thing. It's a measurement of entropy occurring among things that can and do exist. Is that what you meant? But we also know that there is no elapse of time to a photon traveling at the speed of light from its own perspective. It's a massless particle, not a "thing" in that sense. Time only has meaning once it slows or stops and radiates. I trust you'll tell me if I'm wrong if you like. I'm still learning this stuff!

The universe is engaged in a cascade down an entropic gradient, at the end of which the useable energy will all have been turned into unusable energy, and it will be impossible to make a pina colada or do a jigsaw. So enjoy it while you got it!

That's right. But that still doesn't mean that time always existed. As an inseparable component of spacetime, where there is no space, there also can be no time. @@user-kb8lr5ed4l

Nothing is free. Those endless ads make you the commodity that is bought and sold.

@@mikemondano3624 Yeh, you're right. But, I listen to these videos when I am at work on my laptop on firefox with the extension "RU-vid enhancer" so..

They already had 1 titled "How Did Our Universe Begin". Kuhn & his producer simply rehash the same themes under different titles.

I agree. The 'how' question needs to be answered before it can be determined if the 'why' question even applies.

Both are equally valid questions that can be answered simultaneously. Genesis 2:18 @@tomjackson7755

This is to misguide us so we click to watch such clips:(

How (fluctuations) is less important then why )so one would not be alone). May I suggest the teachings of Jesus as outlined in the New Testament?

My 2 cts, I tell it a bit flat so again its a pointer not a total complete explanation about your question. for what its worth in the rough. The challenge in comprehending whether the universe had a beginning lies in the inherent limitations of our human perspective. As observers, we only perceive fragments of reality, not its entirety. This is particularly true for our understanding of the universe. Our observations and measurements are confined to segments of the whole, leading to conclusions that lack a broader dimensional perspective. Our experiences, based on these partial observations, inadvertently shape our perception of the universe's complete nature. To illustrate this concept, consider a metaphor: Imagine we are three-dimensional beings observing a two-dimensional world inhabited by flat, two-dimensional beings. We introduce a toilet roll into their world, each segment colored differently. We propose a game where they predict the color of the next segment after a certain number of rounds, based on the primary colors we've described. For these two-dimensional beings, this is a game of chance. However, from our three-dimensional vantage point, we can accurately predict the outcome of each round. What appears random and statistical in two dimensions is entirely predictable from a three-dimensional perspective. This metaphor highlights our situation as humans. Our observations and experiences of the universe are incomplete; we perceive only parts of a much larger whole. Therefore, it's challenging to describe and solve the mysteries of the universe, as it requires a holistic approach. Unifying the complexity of the universe into a single coherent theory is a formidable task. It involves discovering a key element that harmoniously integrates all forces and aspects into one unified whole. This pursuit of unification is complex, as it demands an understanding beyond the fragments we currently perceive.

Science may only be limited to inside the universe, we have no clue how much of it applies outside and talking about the WHY the universe exists means we are talking outside of the universe.

because it require a first cause of EVERYTHING ...and this first cause can be only A) a kind of consciousness B) random chance that started we dont know why.

@@maxhagenauer24 I agree!

@@francesco5581 A first cause is something that exists without reason, I see that just as illogical as an infinite regression.

Thank you! This is my belief but I rarely hear it! Most of us believe time will go infinitely into the future so why should we not assume it was infinite in the past? Infinite regression. The answer is so simple.

It's also possible that the Universe is just a small fragment, like an atom, compared to a much, much bigger structure. Our knowledge of the ultimate reality is most likely comparable to that of a bacteria found 30 km below the surface of the Earth

If the universe is infinitely old in the past, wouldn’t that have to mean that time is also travelling towards the past? (As well as travelling into the future as per our current representation of the universe)

Yes. However. The Big Bang the the Universe are One and the same.

Forget about going forward and regressing. Time is RELATIVE. @@rexreynolds9203

Just shut up. You have nothing of value.

I don’t think anything started the multiverse. Logic world say the multiverse is eternal and our observable universe is a spark that has infinite room to expand, along with infinite other universes in an infinite sea of bubbles. Some bubbles expand forever, some collapse, some pop, some recycle to new universes.

What if the universe never began? And all we experience is an illusion of the mind. The cosmic mind

human imagination and umdrstanding has no bounds. if anyone went back 500 years and told the people of the day how a airplane flies they would understand it easily. just mostly no idea how to build it without help.

Agree. Our human brain has a hard time to understand infinity, our brain can only do what it can do, such as asking why, wanting conclusion, etc. in doing this, we digressed from accepting infinity

There's never been a "Big Bang" anywhere in the Universe. There's only one Universe. No "multiverses" at all. Only one relatively simple universal dynamic, one natural and highly causal "direction".

lately ive begun to think the same thing... big bang may be the first time the universe recycled or the billionth time mind numbing for sure...or i can be like my wife whos only concern is whether to go to kohls or bath body works

@@letitsnow8518right. But here’s a good way to think of infinity without stretching you brain to grasp it in its entirety. Infinity could be defined as everything outside of nothingness, regardless of infinity’s size. Infinity doesn’t have to go on forever, it just means it’s boundless. It could be boundless at any size, as long as it has nothing to contain it. Imagine two balloons that are separated by an arbitrary space. The space between the balloons are still something. But if the balloons were separated by true “nothing,” they would touch, even if the nothing were infinite. Because with nothing, space-time doesn’t exist. Now, imagine infinite number of balloons touching one another because the space between them does not exist. So….there are somethings and nothings. We only care about the somethings. So everything that exists is all there is to exist, and it is not contained.

@@davenchopany number besides 1 or infinite times, would seem odd to me. Why would the universe do its thing only 23,000 or a billion times? If it’s infinite, it would have infinite time to expand or crunch.

I think the important question is really “Whose fault is it?”

Funny and thought provoking.

Funny how? 😀

Yes, we know that there's no beginning and no end. The simple unstoppable causal process is the proof.

@@longcastle4863scary funny. Sometimes it’s best not to think about it.

Starting from zero you get a quantum fluctuation that instantly conforms to an infinite bose-einstein condensate that is continually resuming normal state, decaying from a Higgs boson that gives initial mass.

ZeroOskul • There's no "zero" in the real dynamic of the Universe, in the REALITY. "Zero" something, a "beginning" from "zero", etc, are all just useless, unreal theoretical models made up by the human brain only.

Agree. Although I'd label what you call reality as Existence. Reality is a human centric construct IMO.

@@browngreen933 Yes, i use both words, i have not tot solved for my self wich one i should use, not being eng helps there ofc not. So iam exploring there, but you show an interesting point. I had the same problem with Truth. Some concepts i am exploring what label fits those concepts best. so i note your suggestion, thanks ;)

@@blijebij To me Existence is the underlying basis of what is, what has been, and what shall be for eternity. Reality is what we awaken to in this life-state and experience for a brief time before being swallowed up again by the great mystery of Existence. Just my personal opinion. Thanks!

@@browngreen933 Yes i will go seriously ponder this, it is a very good suggestion :)

@@blijebij Back to your original point, yes I can't see either how the present universe is the same thing as ultimate Existence (reality). Existence was there in some form before the present universe began and will continue after after the current universe cycle ends. IOW, the universe is a temporary manifestation of fundamental Existence which goes on forever. Not exactly the same thing. TY.

That’s because they don’t need to work, drive, pay bills, and do taxes. Hell, I’d be out catching sun too if I didn’t have to work tomorrow! 😎🤩

I don't think that's true. I can recall, at the age of 5 or 6, asking my mom how far the universe went, then completely amazed that she didn't know the answer! From that point, I wanted to know more and especially more than she or my dad did, because he was no help, either. At about that age, a big earthquake hit. Ergo, nature produced plenty of anxiety. Amazement and anxiety can occur at any age. Often, young or old, we don't talk about it enough for others to see our experience unless forced to do so. We stop talking only when we can't find answers or comfort. Then we leave it up to scientists and others, who may or may not be up to any good.

Because you want an iPhone and lights in your home.

@@dr_shrinker Precisely, hardly any responsibilities.

That's bc children are too uneducated to ask educated questions. Like many adults. E.g., let anyone try to explain what a star or a neutron star is. Most people have no clue, where to begin. There is to wonder and there is ignorance.

The universe CAN'T be infinite. All space, time, and matter began with the Big Bang. For something to exist before that, it would have to be nowhere (no space), made of nothing (no matter), never (no time). Good luck proving that.

In your totally uninformed opinion which is worthless.

@@d.r.tweedstweeddale9038 - You think the universe somehow existed before the Big Bang? LOL. Prove it. Go on, I'll wait.

@dr_shrinker I agree with that assessment. I like to think about a paradox that can be imagined with a simple line. Suppose the line extends infinitely in one direction, but that the other end of the line has a definite point of termination. If you attempt to the traverse the line starting from the terminated side of the line and moving *at any speed* towards the infinitely-extended side of the line, you will never arrive at the other end of the line. HOWEVER, to do the opposite, which is to traverse the line starting at an infinite distance from the terminated side and then travel towards the final point of termination, still moving *at any speed*, you still would never arrive at the other end. How bizarre that an infinite can be bounded on one side and yet still be infinite.

And where is your evidence??? I thought so. 😂😂

Nope. In our universe only abstractions (like numbers or sets) can be infinite. Nothing REAL is infinite.

Even if it's infinite, there is still a reason it exists, there would have to be.

Our universe began when time started.

@@ItsEverythingElse What caused time? Did anything?

@@teleamorand why is infinity only applied to nothing real and not something real?

Same. CCC has its flaws, but it makes the most sense imo

Yes The Universe or something what we don't know is eternal. No beginning no end.

@@ComommonlyCensored Penrose is one of the greatest physicists that ever lived.

I agree, but then he says that freewill exists. Which I'm having none of.

OBGynKenobi- Nope, not buying your nonsense. Universe CAN'T be infinite. Real infinities are impossible.

Who created God?

@@longcastle4863 No one / no thing That's the point. All things point and stop at God.

@@japanimated9683 That’s a logical error called, special pleading. If _a God can have always existed,_ then why not _a Universe can have always existed?_

@@longcastle4863 You say that as if it's impossible for something to be both special pleading and true at the same time.

​@@japanimated9683 Well yes, otherwise who decides what is suitable for special pleading or not? I could decide 1 + 1 = 11 because I proclaim myself the lord of numbers. Who decides God has that prerogative?

No

Yet here you are. @@owdeezstrauz

🤣Love you man! Happy weekend. @@owdeezstrauz

It didn’t begin. We are just dreaming

I also wonder how can it expand into all directions when there where no directions?? How can the edge of the universe move towards nothing? I geuss there must be something outside the edge or the big bang is wrong. Maybe space itself is infinite in size and the big bang is just a bunch of matter that exploded inside this space. Instead of space only coming to existence after the big bang

Calculate on, measure on, hypothesize on. Search, and you will find.

Who says energy cannot be created or destroyed

misterh5 • Really? What's "energy" in REALITY?🤔😮

​@@letitsnow8518the whole science community. Prove them wrong prove me wrong. Go ahead and create a new energy and show us.

The Monoliths's did it. "My god, it's full of stars."

*... could have been ... Curious though... What do you mean? Please explain (?).

So stupid to say “could OF..”.