Ms. Mersini-Houghton is Albanian, the Albanian people should be proud. Ms. Mersini-Houghton is also an American; which makes me proud. She is also a member of the human race: we should all be proud. What a beautiful mind in such a beautiful person. Thank you, Ms, Mersini-Houghton!
IMO, this talk is fascinating. It gives me a finger hold on the cliff of life, which I've been climbing for almost 70 years. As a child in the 50's, I had a recurring dream of traveling towards, but never reaching, different universes than than this one.
@@DoctorTurdmidget not to be an a hole but humans don't know anything about this universe and we haven't seen any of it. we are fixed in a point staring out at infinite worlds and stars
Thank you for this presentation. I just finished Doctor Laura Mersini-Houghton's very informative, well written, and entertaining book "Before the Big Bang". All I can say is, read it if you truly want a brilliant insight into a fascinating "Before the Big Bang" theory. Dr. Laura is a genius!
A wonderful talk which is brimming with historical tidbits, ideas, and observations that are accessible to my little mind. Huge thank you to Laura Mersini-Houghton for sharing her time with us and to RI for sharing this talk. 🌺
Albania must be very proud producing such a person. Love her calm, careful manner. A brilliant lady. Bringing it all back to the wave function, while expanding our horizons.
She and most western scientists lie a lot. Cosmic Inflation is an unscientific lie that some scientists say without shying. The early universe was very big and likely energy returned to and made a lot collection of energy like that. There are ancient knowledge more accurate than western science.
The eternal growth of the universe increases entropy always. The universe is not only the observerble universe, and a gravitational force can convert matter into energy decreasing the entropy in the observable universe. All the matter in the universe would come back, becoming energy with the help of the particles that make the gravitational force. The Buddha explained that process in detail. Also, Buddhism explains how 4 fundamental elements become 8 elements and then 24 elements, causing to make the body of the matter (particle), and then become a collection of matter (atoms). Western science is like a baby compared to the Buddha's knowledge about the universe. Some people try to use science to bend science to popularize to support creationism. It is their shamelesness.
@@PurnamadaPurnamidam, Meditation helps people a lot. The CMB radiation doesn't show an explosion. And it is a mirror that hide the history (start) of the universe. A contraction could make matter and antimatter. Antimatter particles can't make large atoms with more than 1 anti-proton. According to the 2500 years old teachings about the universe, The world starts to end during the contraction period of the universe which begins with a rain of liquid energy and destroys the world and heavenly worlds including material Brahma worlds within a duration called Sanvatta Asankhya Kalpa. The contraction of the universe continues without material worlds during Sanvattai Asankhya Kalpa. And then, the universe starts to expand with a rain of liquid energy called Sampatthi Mahamegha during a similar period called Vivatta Asankhya Kalpa. Also, the duration of the further expansion (called Vivattai Asankhya Kalpa) that starts with the formation of worlds is similar to the duration of the first period of expansion that filled the universe with a rain of liquid energy beams (called Sampatthi Mahamegha), the rain that stopped falling before the start of the formation of worlds that happens with the further expansion. Again, the universe contracts and destroy worlds during Sanvatta Asankhya Kalpa. Gravitons or any other force would bring matter back to the center of gravity with an acceleration, causing them to become beams of high-energy particles that gain energy with the contraction that causes matter to pass through the center of the universe. The period between the start of Vivattai Asankhya Kalpa and the end of Vivatta Asankhya Kalpa is called a Mahā-Kalpa. The Buddha said that a rain of energiezed water (like water sticks, water robs, etc) fill the world (island universe) gradually, and stay stably filled for a long time until cosmic air (space element) comes into the filled world (island universe), causing to expand the universe. And then, the world (island universe) stay stably expanded until the contraction. Perhaps, the virtual particles in space (like air) come into low dense space areas (between galaxies) until those virtual particles can go there uniformly near the speed of light. It is more scientific explanation than the unscientific cosmic inflation theories and assumptions. Try to be open-minded and use your brain when you learn something.
Thank you Laura ,Ï''m feeling proud of you (I'm an Albanian too).I am asking you to make this great event here in Albania in a prime time .Your theory is fascinating please make this happen in Albania.I beg you! Best regards!
No matter how much science and research is used in any conversation about the origins or reality of what we name as “the universe”, it will always be extraordinarily elementary. In fact it will be more elementary than a newborn baby as compared to an advanced scientist. The reason this is so is that any view at all that any human being conceives or perceives is a completely subjective view/reality . Another way of saying this is that any persons view of “reality” is ALWAYS…. Congealed subjectivity. Entering directly within heart the reality of the unfolding moment arriving from the future- which is so incredibly rare for humans (currently), can NEVER be explained through conceptual awareness. all scientific views are always built on foundation of CONCEPTUAL awareness, rather than the awareness of perceiving the unfolding moment.
Her book is even better. If you already know something about the energy landscape of string theory and something about Schrodinger's wave function of quantum mechanics, Mersini-Houghton's book Before the Big Bang will really bring it all together. It provides a larger view of reality that explains not only of why our universe is what it is (it's not the anthropic principle or even randomness) but also what came before. Her theory doesn't answer every question (such as, is time itself eternal?) but it demolishes the "we are special" argument that Copernicus also demolished so long ago. Our universe is not special. It is one of many possible, but it is also a highly likely configuration. It explains why our universe exists and where it came from.
Great lecture. I don’t have a problem with this concept. That the cosmos happened at all gives me every reason to think there are other instances of it occurring. We know infinity is real even though it’s impossible to comprehend. So much room for stuff to happen.
@@Mindboggles maths proves that the concept is real, for eg when it comes to dividing or halving something over and over and over, etc. It never ends. Also, regarding the universe , to start fr nothing, nothingness is impossible. There never was a start. Everything is, was and will always be. At the same time all is present, "past" and "future". These terms are handy for us to organise, record and plan. But that's all it is. No such concept existed pre hominid as far as we as a species are aware "right now". When you have connected and perhaps astral projected you will KNOW too
We don't know infinity is real. Infinity is a convenience, a convention, used by physicists to assist certain assumptions, but that does not mean physicists think infinity is real.
@@ashcross we have no reason to believe it doesn't. It's far far more likely that it does. It is by far way easier to understand as an idea than to believe it dpesnt. It's a far stranger concept to believe everything ends or will end at some point.
Charlotte Simonin : I got a bit lost during the Talk, enjoyable though it was. Did you pick up if Laura's theory includes the 7 extra dimensions of String Theory? And is there infinite versions of me and you in infinite universes? Sorry, it's maybe unfair to ask you but i'd like to know what you think.
@@briansmith3791 Briam, From what I can tell she is including the 11 dimensions, Four classical and the 7 mathematical insights. She found, in her analysis using Standard Model quantum physics assumptions, that decoherence allows the D-map picture to be perhaps evidence of mutiuniverses. That is a long way from the infinite division of the world theory. Both of which have been roundly criticized by DR Sabine Hossenfelder in her book and by Sean Carroll in his books," Something Deeply Hidden" most recently "The Biggest Ideas in the Universe" I personally lack the mathematical sophistication to appropriately express an opinion on any of the assumptions made by any of the three. However, from my limited perspective, there seem to be some fundamental problems with, the Standard Model, and String Theory. This may be because 70 years of Classical Physics has saturated my brain.
@@charlottesimonin2551 : Yeah, it's tough on the noggin, although you seem to have a much better grasp than me. I watched Sean Carroll recently speaking on his 'Many Worlds' theory, i thought his and Laura's theory were similar. What do i know? lol Laura mentioned Roger Penrose's CCC theory, i found his ideas to be amazing too. It's an incredible universe indeed, thanks for replying .
@@charlottesimonin2551hi , could you be so kind as to explain what is really going on? By this i mean on one side you have laura apprently suggestiong that the multiverse is a very valid and scientific theory and on the other hand you have sabine saying that the multiverse is not science at all and cannot be proven. Even penrose is very critical of the multiverse goes so far as say string theory is not applicable because it predicts 11 dimensions which is not true.
In my comment I was thinking of the Mathematical basis of some of the theory. There is a real separation between what mathematics may tell us and what constitutes "science." Sabine makes that point in her two books. While physics needs math to clarify and define their observations the math is not reality. This is no place less clear than in quantum theory. @@willowwisp1000
The Chernobyl incident happened in 1986, April, the fall of Berlin wall happened in November 1989, I was a teenager and i remember that storic time very well !
I really would like to see the video footage when she was laughing while talking about the event at the nuclear reactor as instead only the slide was shown. A great and interesting talk. Thanks for sharing.
How could the probability of the universe coming into existence be calculated in any useful way when the previous *state* was an eternal/timeless void?
It’s completely insane that Laura Mersini-Houghton came by this theory as I have traveled in neuroscience and evolutionary psychology to a similar internal origin and meaning of all things. It’s like we travelled on the same Möbius strip, occluded by that strip, and soon we will meet. Mind and matter. Thank you so much for this talk, and all your struggles and work for our future. ❤️🔥🙏🏻 My father also played classical music to us as children and he talked about what it meant/symbolized to him. Cherished memories. I just got your book and I am reading it now. I am sure we will speak at some time in the future because of our “parallel universes”😂. 🥰👍🏻There are other ways to see the evidence for these things which I have devised methodology to demonstrate. No one will listen or pay attention so far… but when the Möbius comes around, and we do meet, they will have to pay attention because we are the future of life. ♾🧠♾ Things obvious to me take others a while to get to I have found over the years. I also know the nature of the “occcams razor” of the multiverse, and other mechanisms. All my predictions from my theories also have been borne out. Thank you again: one of my favorite talks ever. ❤ To anyone reading this far, and who dismisses what I am saying, remember that you read this here. Remember that I was here and knew these things far in advance, but because of peoples internal “walls” and assumptions about reality, they did not understand what I was saying. They never expected a real revolution in thought changing everything at its foundation. Especially right in the middle of a knowledge explosion which gave us cell phones… 😂 So I don’t blame you for your ignorance. For how I have been rejected by institutions and journals, etc. while the confirmations of the theory roll steadily in down the years. Psychology COULDN’T have ANYTHING To Do with physics, no, that CANNOT happen. And biology cannot predict physical structures and what is beyond event horizons, no. We can NEVER know that… Well, once people with authority believed we could never walk on the moon. A word of advice: never say we “can’t”. Thanks 😊 Moreover, RUN from those who say we cannot, we can’t, we will not, we won’t, RUN from them. 😊👍🏻 They know nothing about what knowledge or epistemology actually is. They are only projecting how they are onto things. Science is not an epistemological dictatorship. I hope this illustrates my joy at hearing this talk.
for the beginning of the kosmos look for signature of symmetry breaking, because like black holes surrounded by a density, there should be one. The Kosmic membrane is a good place to start, but youll have to get data from the aliens.
I loved her presentation and her book. Now I want to know whether she (and others) see each universe as a ‘bubble’, that is surrounded by some form of a membrane, and if so what this membrane consists of. Also, as each universe winds down there is a lot of cold dead matter and energy left. Does this ‘stuff’ become part of the Landscape (which I see in my minds eye as an ocean/landscape)? If so, what part does this ‘stuff’ play in the creation/development of new universes? When a new universe ‘bangs’ how does the bang affect the landscape? Does the mass of the universes exert a gravitational effect on the landscape or other universes within the landscape? I also have questions based on the answers to the above questions. I would love to direct my questions directly to Ms Mersini-Houghton, but I have no idea on how I can make that happen.
I always get stuck right away on the semantics of a "multiverse". The word "universe" always used to mean the entity which contains everything in existence. How can you even have multiple universes? It seems absurd by definition. Why isn't the supposed "multiverse" just called the universe instead? Just to confuse those of us who cling to the old-fashioned concept of the word? What is the new meaning of the word "universe", such that there can be multiples of it? What is it that now distinguishes something as a "universe" under this new terminology? It seems unnecessarily confusing to just whimsically change the meaning of an important word, just to... i don't know... make our new "multiverse" theory sound more tantalizing and amazing? It sounds nonsensical on the face of it to me.
Best exponation I ever heard. And makes all the sense. Hundreds of years ago, people though only our planet existed. So now we know that's far from real. So why would only 1 universe exist?
i am a 18 year old teenager......and i really understood everything, it made me thinking and make question myself at many points....i bet the day is comeing soon when we will discover something that will turn the tables of this world
Brilliant - I am reading her book at the moment, its easy to follow even for a layman such as myself. Also, if they ever do a biopic movie of her I think Famke Janssen would be an awesome casting choice. :o)
Wonderful!! Wonderful!! Thank you so much, Ma'am. I paid rapt attention most of the time. Only one question, was there an exclusion principle at the beginning that might have made our universe exclusive?
I think a combination of string theory and Penroses CCC theory is our best bet to answering this question. Love the idea that down at the Planck scale, space itself is strings, and when a universe 'dies', the 'vibrational mode' of the strings can radically change, creating radically different universes, but all universes past and future, are all located in the same space (i.e. where I am now in this universe wouldve been the same place in a different universe, regardless of the differences between the two universes...different universes built upon the same location/foundation, only the strings vibrations are what change). I also believe the beyond the edge of our observable universe, is just more of our universe. Very much looking forward to this video...
Well of course it’s more universe it’s just in space that’s expanding faster than the speed of its light can reach us. Or we really are a simulation and it’s empty to save RAM
Dr. Mersini-Houghton is a brilliant mind and her ground-breaking theory is fascinating considering the indications observed in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). BIG THANKS also to The Royal Institute for this great lecture!
This is a great example of the ability of the human minds imagination to manifest science fiction. I have no issue with endless postulations for the origins/ causal agent of this reality as long as the person who proposes such things admit there is no possible way to test/ replicate their musings. It is a very interesting topic even though ones life will surely be wasted if it is spent with the sole intention of solving this unknowable question. One thing is certain about this reality. It is set up for endless discovery and each revelation reveals more questions for the next generation of sentient beings to discover. As long as scientific endeavor understands this humbling primafacia fact knowledge will surely grow and the human race will inevitably expand out into the cosmos on a never ending quest to learn.
@@TucsonD1 thats what the towering intellects of science claimed 100 plus years ago about living cells( which they felt sure was just a mixture of chemicals and claimed to show scientific evidence) yet the more science digs into these information packed self replicating factories the farther away the goal post to comprehension recedes as to how such a system could randomly self coalesce. The exact same situation can be documented with origins of matter,the laws of physics and the cosmological contstants . My assertion stands as to calling such postulations musings and there is a,100%certainty history will show this to be the case and she will be relegated into the countless unverifiable musing footnotes of scientific literature .the same as the numerous alternate postulations put forth by equally accredited scientists. The fact is such musings on this subject will forever continue ( even far beyond the day we can manipulate the laws of physics at will thusly creating any reality imaginable and achieving the status of ""prime law manipulators". This will be far into the future and still we would never be able to claim why or how the laws and matter manifested from nothing pointlessly into fine tuned functionality . Why? As every attempt to manifest( or replicate) purposful functionality from a point of zero will inevitably require massive intelligent manipulation thusly rendering the goal of proving such things mindlessly came to be the height of illogical absurdity...
It is time for Laura Mersini-Houghton to write a Scientific American article. I recall Halliwell has written something in 1991 "Quantum Cosmology and the Creation of the Universe" - Jonathan J. Halliwell, Scientific American Dec 1991
Great talk - history, context, facts, and imagination. I think there was and is an eternal fundamental energy substrate from which many universes spawn.
I'm black, and I regret never having a role model when I was younger to show that physics was something available to me, to pursue academically. It's even more palpable, because of the impression that it was due to lack of aptitude. I loved Star Trek, especially Voyager and I, in time looked up to captain Janeway as that role model, in curiosity, determination and daring. But, it was too late to make the realisation, that STEM could have been a pursuit. I wish, apart from just presenting scientific discoveries, more should be done to address, the lack of representation, accessibility and visibility of black people in these fields of scientific inquiry. It is important, not for prestige, but for bringing ever diverse and new minds into our collective endeavour to understand and create a future where we are contributing to the betterment of this beautiful cosmos, of which we have the privilege to be a part of and perhaps caretakers of. We need not restrict others, by unintentionally projecting prejudices of intellectual limitations. We must make our existence a progressive and collective endeavour.
I hear you, and, as a woman, I get what you are saying. Really appreciated seeing this presentation, not least because it's still too rare to hear a woman's voice in this field. Aside from that very important point regarding role models that you raised, I'm no scientist, but found her desire & ability to SHARE her ideas made it possible for me to follow them.. This feels as important as the ideas themselves, because so many people lack that vital aspect ~ to teach in a way that starts with truly wanting to impart the knowledge & thinking to as many people as possible. The ones who come across as more egoic, wishing to impress those already in the know, their peers and 'competitors' leave the rest of us out in the cold.. Seems such a waste of knowledge, or very limiting. It's great to inspire & create a desire to learn more in other people, the more minds the merrier, and potentially the more likelihood of solving or expanding the big puzzle! Just my opinion, ofc, but also my experience! Best wishes 🌌✨
I mean no offence... I also didn't have a role model and I'm white. I dropped out of highschool and worked factories for 20 years. I knew I could to better so I decided to attend University in science degrees and changed my life. Is there any reason why being black prevents you from doing what I did? We all have to identify goals and work hard to achieve them. That's how it is for most people on earth. All I can say is do your best in whichever situation you're in and I wish you the best.
@MKRex I would say victimization in the name or racial discrimination does not work in your favor in this case with her (prof. laura) being an immigrant in usa.
Ms marsini Houghton, the question I have for you is this? What do you believe happened at the beginning. Not what anyone else thinks or believes. What do you actually think happened to get to here? I'm curious 🤔.
Loved this talk. Would like to hear more about what entropy might do going forward and with how dark matter and dark energy might be expected to play their parts in that.
@@thomasgabriel1985 One step at a time, please :) But yes, a very good question! My answer to it is not going to satisfy a whole lot of people... The Creator, or God, - or in my sci-fi mind, it might be a Super Multiverse - again with a Creator (God) - but then - who created the Creator ? Some would say the Creator always was and always will be. I simply do not know the ultimate answer - please let me know when you find it. :)
@@thomasgabriel1985 I agree. But my trouble with that (dilemma) is, what first cause could there be without something preceding it? I cannot, myself, resolve this interesting situation. Maybe when some other things are resolved about dark matter, dark energy, and proof of concept of multi-verse I'll be able to come satisfying answer. But, as they say, I'm not holding my breath for that. :)
For all the good and bad in the world one thing astounds me .The lack of basic intelligence.If we measured this as a human species test ,besides all the cultural da da da factors I think we would be shocked how low the score is .This wonderful lecture highlights my point .Not eloquently expressed but hope my point is understood .Thanks
So I've thought about the question multi-verse? And here is my answer. As you well know, we live in bubbles of EMFS, but the main source of these generated EMF's is our Blacksphere. So my answer is kind of a question all wrapped together. Can we test field strength of the CMB? If that's possible then what we're looking for is where that field strength changes. Eventually the farther we look the field strength may change a bit stronger or a bit weaker. If we can find the position of change and it's consistent you have found a second universe. This make most sense to me. Everything in our universe will fly under the same field strength only when this strength has changed will it be another universe. I say this for good reason. With our galaxy our source of EMFs comes from the Blacksphere, but I believe you'll find that field strength the same from core to edge. The stars we see shine are like power plants when a new star is born the strength of the original source is restored, and our galaxy remains balanced. I believe this same process will happen when we scale up or down. You want to find another universe look for this change in the EMFS. Field strength is crucial for stability, there may only be 1 universe, but there may be different matter-verses out there. And you may be correct. But like Einstein and bohr, we are prisoners of our time, and our information is still lacking. But we will get there. Peace ✌️ from Canada, eh.
How can the rapid expanding universe be slowed enough so a signal traveling at light speed can can pass through one entangled black hole, through the wormhole, and come out the other entangled black hole… if the wormhole continues to expand at a faster rate than light-speed? Perhaps placing a series of “outposts” or rally points throughout a wormhole could receive the signal and rebroadcast the signal from station to station… like a relay race… that can exceed the rate of the expanding space?
This was excellent, thx, I know about Hugh Everett and I like some of the Eels songs, idk about this family connection. Prof Laura Mersini-Houghton led me to a 6 part youtube document of Hugh Everett's son finding out about his father. This was also excellent.
So...We push it one step back to a quantum energy background state. We can still ask what came before that. This lady is amazing. Her parents and all of humanity should be proud to have her in this reality.
The game D&D, dungeons and dragons... its been out for 50 years. This teaches the same information. Its taken 50 years for information like this to escape the game tropes into reality.
Time is an essential part and a basic factor of our material Universe - but a special one which cannot be the product of any material process, not even in theory. This is because any material process needs time. But time cannot be the product of a material process for that process would have already needed time as a necessary preconditon to it. But as time did not exist in lack of any material process it could not mean the necessary precondition to any material process that created it.
The lecture begins with reference to what happened before the big bang. Since the big bang is a purely theoretical piece of guesswork maybe we should concentrate on that first. Every new set of data we get makes our theories wobble badly, including the James Webb telescope. Isn’t worrying about multiverses getting ahead of ourselves?
Today I have heard a NYU member speaking about physics prize, derailing Many Worlds into unauthorised derivations, including Sean Carroll's Many Worlds. Your right to arrive at a different place from the same origin is a corollary of Science research. On your field of studies, ultimately, there are many different views, some incompatible, others not, maybe layers or perspective about the same complexity. That's why some have a great consideration for your opinions. More, it includes a great explanatory capacity, the mark of the educated communicators. Congratulations. Although some don't share hope into string theories...
"In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most. No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores. No system of energy can produce sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it. This universal truth applies to all systems. Energy, like time, flows from past to future". Wailing.
Very interesting presentation. I really have a long term interest the 'Origins' question but find it frustrating sorting the wheat from the chaff as far as RU-vid videos in this topic area. This was definitely worthwhile, and I especially appreciate the way Ms Mersini-Houghton explains the way different physical theories have come together to guide her work.
Brian Green, Leonard Susskind, and Sean Carroll are all excellent choices. There are others, of course, but these are a great start. Michio Kaku is half a loon. Deepak Chopra is a fraudster. Stay away from their ilk.
I wonder if “our” universe is “entangled” with “other” universe, or universes. So much theory centers on entangled black holes, producing wormholes between black holes, yet I have not heard anything being said about entire universes being entangled… and having connections.
great explanation...very respected Madam..excellent way of describing..amazing and thank you so much 🙏 for adding ancient Indian point of view about this topic.
The problem of thermodynamics and the beginnings of the universe might be why CERN smashes particles so much. A world/dimension/universe beyond our known physics just be impossibly hot, and impossibly small. Where else would all the energy come from before our big bang? These "wormhole" type non-places. We do not yet know if anything is a faster wavelength than gamma rays.
The starting point of physics is the idea of inertia, but "The knowledge of the straightness of the movement of a body left to itself does not follow from experience. On the contrary!" (Einstein). The fundamental difference between inertia forces and ordinary forces of interaction of bodies is that for inertia forces it is impossible to specify the action of which specific bodies on a material point they describe, they cannot be confused with the Dalembert force of inertia, and they are always external forces. (Newton's first law is not a special case of Newton's second law.) GR reduced gravity to inertia by generalizing the first law: the free movement of test bodies occurs along geodesic lines, but the theory did not find out anything new about the nature of the cause of inertia forces. "... the complete geometrization established by GR introduces a hierarchized cosmos on the plane, indicating indirectly the presence of an elusive source." (Tonnelat). It seems that this source of external (external) inertia forces is an "absolute vacuum" - instead of Newtonian "absolute space", which "... as a cause, does not satisfy the need for a causal explanation." (Born). Finally, the search for the root cause became possible after Friedmann spoke for the first time in a scientific way about the "creation of the world", and even then there was an opportunity to abandon the a priori nature of the law (more precisely, the axiom) of inertia, and build physics on a more reliable basis.
As a logical explanation to explain how this finely tuned universe came to be multiverses is a fantastical way to conclude a omnipotent creator must exits as if all possibility universes exists then God exits in one of them , Hel must exists in one of them, heaven exits in one of them. In,fact anything your mind can imagine factually must exist out there somewhere if infinity exists. Food for thought.
My theory is that the big bang happened but not as most theorists suggest. My belief is that multiverses have always existed. Picture blobs floating in a void. Some are large and some are small. Sometimes these blobs crash into each other. Sometimes violently. When that happens Sometimes one will merge with or tear an opening into the one next to it and some of it's material will leak or enter into the one it collided with. When this happens imagine a universe is like a blood cell and the new material from the other universe is like a virus. That universe's native material (dark energy) tries to repair the tear in it's fabric of space time and eject the foreign material of this foreign universe. In doing so it repairs it's fabric / edge / barrier but still has the foreign material trapped inside itself. The native material keeps attacking and compressing this foreign material to an infinitely small size until it sets up a chain reaction which causes a big bang creating a universe vastly different from the original one. The (original) dark energy is still there but after the big bang it is now trying to eject what we see as galaxies but they have no place to go so it expands further. Well it's a theory as good as any l've heard.
Let there be an infinite number of universes but a human observer is unique to our universe. A human observer is unique not only because of his DNA but also because of his conditioning or programming together with his memory and remembrances; in this context, "The self", "the me", or "the I" is unique; it is a bundle of information. The function of "hyperlinking" or "connecting the dots" is the same for all humans but what makes "the self" or "the me" unique are the "hyperlinks" or "dots" or "units of information" and how these hyperlinks are connected together or networked, that is, the configuration of the hyperlinks or dots or units of information. Having settled on what "the self" or "the me" or "the atman" is we will now consider several humanoids. The humanoids are facsimiles. We then load the same "self" into all the humanoids. Now, the humanoids not only have the same physical and biological configuration but also the same psychological configuration or "the self". That is, I have created several copies of "myself". I place each humanoid in different universes. And in all universes, I give the humanoids the same primordial soup. What will each copy of me choose from the soup? It is obvious that the programming or the conditioning dictates the choice. The humanoid is self-limiting. Because the program dictates the choice, there is no free will. As long as the observer is active, there is observer influence and therefore no free will. Moreover, who is the entity that is willing? The observer. This means that will is never free. It is tied to the observer. Coming back to the question. All the humanoids in all the universes will make the same choice because they cannot see or sense the other choices by virtue of the limits imposed on the senses and the psyche by the humanoid program. The humanoid program is exclusive. The most important point to be noted is that the universes are copies, and the humanoids are copies too but the possibilities are NOT COPIES. Each possibility is unique. And by possibilities, we don't mean human possibilities they are just any possibility. If you accommodate an infinite number of universes, you must also accommodate infinite possibilities, and these possibilities must be different from one another.
I'm sorry, did she really say (repeatedly - and after discussing it with an audience member!!) that the nuclear fallout in Tschernobyl and the fall of the Berlin Wall happened within a timeframe of less than a year? Seriously??? April 1986... November 1989... less than a year... riiiiiight... maybe had a little too much quantum mechanics for today....
Why is the multiverse always depicted pictorially as being universes adjacent to one another, as if there was more space available for each to occupy? Surely, they'd simply occupy the exact same space as this universe but simply be invisible to us and have minimal impact on our universe. They might explain the missing mass of this universe needed for gravity to be such as it is. They may be what is being detected by radio telescopes. They may even be the source of cosmic background radiation.
Who needs an after life or living forever or having children if we know we exist in endless universes where we have echoes of life from every thought creating a new universe as a reactionary string or strand. But on the other hand if I die today, does my set of universes end with my death? If so then we should be very worried about living as long as we can so our universes can find a way to grow beyond the limits we have imposed on ourselves by having not understood reality. Could we not use the mars rovers and robots as well as every probe we have ever sent out into space to look for interactions between waves/particles from various universes and doesn't that answer the question of why a particle can be in two different places simultaneously or at very closely related moments in our reality? That sounds like waves from different universes overlapping in our reality to me. And doesn't that mean that time only has a value when it is observed as well? What does that mean if time is a valueless thing that is only measurable when we want it to be? And doesn't that make our predictions inherently mistaken at every instance? Because we want time to be a thing measured so when we use it as a measure our expectation is met, etc. We answer our own question which must be answered by something else outside of our reality. So a space telescope is only in our reality when we communicate with it. SO it's observations are going to be wrong or unexpected until we correct our expectation to match what it is recording? It is in it's own reality, but it is programmed to measure for certain results because we expected certain results. Yes I know this is confirmation bias as a definition that is why I am bringing it up. So if there is only one space telescope, how can we ever hope to be correct about anything it is recording? The whole set of ideas just seems a bit compromised by our own biased reality. So no matter what system of checks and balances we set up, we are still setting those things up with an expectation that we are correct based on other successes. Nutz. All I know is my reality reveals itself daily and it often is not very much to look at. And the older I get the less it matters as I happen to live in this reality where many types of stem cell research is banned and our governments refuse to save the very real planet I walk on that they have helped destroy. The fact is if you resolve this thing we have as a construct then you have no real need to invest in it. And isn't that the problem overall for why we are not a united planet with insoluble and immutable rights for everyone? Bah. So lets see, you find another universe, you figure out how to shift between them with particle physics, entanglement or cookies and cream ice cream. So the rich and powerful invite you along with them as they leave us all here to die. The End.
I like how with such ease she talks about most controversial topics in physics like they are de facto truth and not just theories that have proponents and opponents in the scientific community. There's no doubt in her mind that multiverse exists. Well, good for her.. I prefer the sceptical inquisitive and all probative approach of "Closer to Truth" series on YTB
@Vinzent B so at 11:15 when she speaks about "origin of the universe from quant landscape multiverse" you think because they "made some calculations" that beautiful colorful slide is 100% proven and not just a theory, right? More like a documentary for you? And when Closer to truth interviews some of the biggest minds in Physics today (A.Guth, B.Greene, M.Kaku, R.Penrose, L.Krauss etc etc) what those top physicists are saying are more like some hunches, right? Don't embarrass yourself.. Closer to truth opus is ENORMOUS
Also,if I knew everything there is to know, including about the future and the past would not the effect drive the cause. Then you would not be able to understand would you? In some returning universe the results are driving the cause and visa versa because they are the same, somewhere but the same.
