Searching For Cosmic Origins 

I started reading and listening to physics and cosmology lectures about 10 years ago and I didn't understand most of what I read, but what I did understand was intriguing. Don't give up, the more you listen the more you will understand. I'm at a point in time now where I'm really interested in finding more about the mathematics. After all science is about seeking what we don't know . And you know the old saying, the one thing I know for sure is that I don't know

Yeah , if he was not explaining all these, I would be lost in the physics world

@@Photonphantom he’s taken up Carl Sagan’s mantel - explainer in chief

Yeah, he is 😊

Yeah many of his books ARE BRILLIANT

Yeah, the guy is a legend 💯👍

We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of this universe

Gold is useless at the time of war 😮 Say its plastic. Never useless 😂

I am also thankful to him

Yeah, for an idiot like me, it is very crystal clear 😅

See, he never read these comments

This is applicable 😊

wow nice rings harry

@@harrie1340Thanxz

@@Harry-Hartmann bitte Gerne

@@harrie1340Danke

@@harrie1340 wie wie weißt Du dass ich ein Deutscher bin?

Einstien stated time is RELATIVE-/you can only measure it RELATIVLEY...the present to X(here & now to there and then/13.8 billion years ago) is RELATIVE so I dont see the issue?

Now existed. And when someone says 13.8 billion years ago, they're referring to the approximation of now that existed within the timeframe they said/thought it.

Space is not the same for all observers, time is not the same for all observers, but the spacetime interval is. It is said to be "invariant".

​@@r1nger81What we call "13.8 bil years ago". Could that same event also mean something like "8 bil ago" or "21bil ago" for another random observer? Or not?

13.8 is an estimation based on the limit we can detect distant astrological objects due to the speed of light reaching Earth bound observers. Yes, it is a quantum limit that impacts astrological observations. That's all it is. The universe may well be older, but we are limited to what we can sense through our telescopes and our computational math.

I imagine that it is because the measurements and photo's of the background radiation are always taken Outside the Earth's atmosphere. The type of radiation would depend on the material and its concentration, I am sure that physicists have devices which are able to detect and differentiate between all types-from whatever source.

Dear God, I wouldn't even allow you to teach music after reading this.

It is the color of ionized hydrogen shifted by expansion

And what is that? They calculate what? Is there a single number they use or it is all newton and einstein said so?@@davidfannin7187

i'm up here in Scotland ,and our black pudding, is better than yours!

@@jsnedd66 Nothing like a Yorkshire pudding 😂

Propably

[2D is not the center of the universe, 0D is the center of the mirror universe]: The mirror universe theory is based on the concept of parity violation, which was discovered in the 1950s. Parity violation refers to the observation that certain processes in particle physics don't behave the same way when their coordinates are reversed. This discovery led to the idea that there might be a mirror image of our universe where particles and their properties are flipped. In this mirror universe, the fundamental particles that make up matter, such as electrons, protons, and neutrinos, would have their charges reversed. For example, in our universe, electrons have a negative charge, but in the mirror universe, they might have a positive charge. Furthermore, another aspect of the mirror universe theory involves chirality, which refers to the property of particles behaving differently from their mirror images. In our universe, particles have a certain handedness or chirality, but in the mirror universe, this chirality could be reversed. Leibniz or Newton: Quantum mechanics is more compatible with Leibniz's relational view of the universe than Newton's absolute view of the universe. In Newton's absolute view, space and time are absolute and independent entities that exist on their own, independent of the objects and events that take place within them. This view implies that there is a privileged observer who can observe the universe from a neutral and objective perspective. On the other hand, Leibniz's relational view holds that space and time are not absolute, but are instead relational concepts that are defined by the relationships between objects and events in the universe. This view implies that there is no privileged observer and that observations are always made from a particular point of view. Quantum mechanics is more compatible with the relational view because it emphasizes the role of observers and the context of measurement in determining the properties of particles. In quantum mechanics, the properties of particles are not absolute, but are instead defined by their relationships with other particles and the measuring apparatus. This means that observations are always made from a particular point of view and that there is no neutral and objective perspective. Overall, quantum mechanics suggests that the universe is fundamentally relational rather than absolute, and is therefore more compatible with Leibniz's relational view than Newton's absolute view. What are the two kinds of truth according to Leibniz? There are two kinds of truths, those of reasoning and those of fact. Truths of fact are contingent and their opposite is possible. Truths of reasoning are necessary and their opposite is impossible. What is the difference between Newton and Leibniz calculus? Newton's calculus is about functions. Leibniz's calculus is about relations defined by constraints. In Newton's calculus, there is (what would now be called) a limit built into every operation. In Leibniz's calculus, the limit is a separate operation. What are the arguments against Leibniz? Critics of Leibniz argue that the world contains an amount of suffering too great to permit belief in philosophical optimism. The claim that we live in the best of all possible worlds drew scorn most notably from Voltaire, who lampooned it in his comic novella Candide.

42 is the one