@ Here is a first baby step in the process of undergoing an exercise in self-assessment: www.independent.co.uk/life-style/5-habits-of-stupid-people-that-smart-people-don-t-have-a7620941.html
@ The nice thing about science is you don't have to take anyone's word for it. If you take the time to learn it, you can examine it all for yourself. The only fundamental things you need to "believe" are that: 1. Logic works: e.g. "it's impossible to have something existing and not existing simultaneously" or "a thing can not have two contradictory properties such as a married bachelor" and 2. The universe is fundamentally an ordered, logical, measurable thing: i.e. rules are universal and not just random luck that they appear that way; e.g. it could be that the properties of electrons are really random and we just have "dumb luck" to always measure them the same, so until proven otherwise, we assume consistency of rules across spacetime (and if proven otherwise, we assume the changes we see are consistent, predictable, and measurable). You don't need to "believe" anything else. If you disbelieve either of these, it makes learning anything or predicting anything at all completely impossible. You couldn't even function in life, so I'm reasonably sure everyone does believe these two facts at *least* on a local scale whether they say they do or not.
That’s how learning works! I’m so glad I live in a time where this stuff is so accessible and well presented. I bet you look up this stuff outside of the videos right?
@@MrHugabum yup I follow Anton Petrov and the SciShow space etc I have no natural sciences academic qualifications but space has always fascinated me. cheers
I teach a high school astrophysics class and I rely heavily on this series to boost my understanding and help me translate difficult concepts to my students. I’m a much better - and more educated - teacher. Thank you Matt O’Dowd.
you teach things to kids that you dont yourself understand? So you just regurgitate pbs spacetime to your students; without the understanding necessary to do so...kewwl
@@tylerboothman4496 I agree; however, you shouldn't be teaching something if you rely "heavily" on anything else to boost your own understanding of it. It's like having a translator that doesn't really know the language they're translating..
@@joemackenzie7417 Should we just ban science in school then? Because the first rule of science - especially quantum physics and astrophysics is "If you think you understand it, you clearly don't."
Indeed, but it's so interesting you have to watch it. I have to admit, quite a few of the videos look like probably the ancient people looked like while trying to explain natural phenomenon such as lightning, wind, etc with their simple understandings...
Id be carefull with statements like that because there is 300 years of math and people from Newton to Dirac and many others and all of it just like your smartphone, its all standing on the shoulders of giants and in a way has a life of its own. There is an outstanding ammount/body of applicable work. And if there is a kind of field of consciousness it does seem to abide by very intricate mathematical systems. I dont know. I might be wrong. Please correct me if i am.
@@ditchweed2275 Dude! I just liked the play on words! But, seriously, - stretching is not the same as the bang. And the bang itself is still a mystery. Just saying. Not trying to belittle anyone's scientific achievements.
More theory and philosophy then something like relativity which can predict observable phenomenon. The early universe was the largest possible black hole and this inflation ripped it apart, what triggered it. Why are super massive black holes not being triggered and ripped apart, this would be a passable observation phenomenon proving the theory if it happened. Just explain at what point this inflation gets triggered does not prove anything but would be a starting point on going beyond philosophy.
@@mykofreder1682 You do realize as far as we know you would need time for this to occur, right? And as far as we know the Big Bang was the beginning of time. So what you are describing couldn't have happened without time existing beforehand, which, as mentioned above, is impossible. Correct me if I'm wrong on those ideas; I might have missed something.
I love how both Fermilab and Space time are using phase transitions of water to describe cosmology or neutrino physics concepts. It makes the material really easy to grasp.
I wonder if he could even comprehend it. At least comprehend it much better than myself. He was really smart overall, but wasn't a super strong mathematician. Archimedes of Sicily would probably be fine. He was an incredibly brilliant mathematician. Both would be highly impressed though.
Well done. You are becoming an expert in interpreting these concepts without the math and scientific lingo. Thanks and to all the staff who support you.
Sad, because everyone does that these days. No one even shows any math or scientific lingo anymore, in presentations for the public. It would be really nice if those things -- using technology -- could be added as subtitles, notations, etc -- while still having the smooth conversational laymans video. Right now, all these physics videos are for kindergartners or preteens really. And everything else is hidden in obscure conferences or papers that haven't been youtubed.
@@Firebrand911 It would be better for a channel to link their sources than actually include them in a video. Kurzgesagt does that and it's perfect. The video ought to be more like an introduction or an overview designed to break it down for easy digestion and then allow each user to choose whether or not they want to follow it up with a deeper search. One it makes the video quicker to produce since you don't have to spend time editing in a long list of (to most people) overly complicated content that mostly ends up being ignored. Two it keeps the video light and informative without running the risk of causing a vast majority of the audience to switch off, which then defeats the point you initially set out to achieve. RU-vid is an entertainment platform and not everyone finds pages of formulae and calculations entertaining. You can always look up the maths for yourself if that's what you really want to do and linked sources would make that easier.
@@AMorphicTool i agree with your idea. This would really be very helpful for those who wish to study in depth. For us laymen, this very video is kind of enough to satisfy the hunger. Though I do love a little bit of formula showing in these videos. Like he does.
I agree, and that's my favorite part: the sense of wonder that these videos can inspire. Even when all else feels mundane or overwhelming, I can find a comfortable distraction in wondering about the universe's enigmas.
The universe was once a 8 sided octagonal crystalline ‘jelly’ with 10 vectors: 2 of which were 180 degrees, or opposite, of each other in opposite 90 degree planes; These opposite poles connected through the structure with one ‘like’ North and South Pole and eight ‘like’ Cardinal poles each representing a direction in 45 degree sections. This structure collapsed (or alternatively, imploded onto itself) at a single point at its midpoint between the North and South poles by first expanding into a round-ended cylindrical rigid octagonal crystalline structure, stabilizing: then through its diameter; collided, rebounded through itself, not quite becoming fully stable, rebounding again, becoming stable as a 𝚂𝚙𝚑𝚎𝚛𝚎 before exploding, projecting its ‘crystalline jelly’ matter infinitely into one barrel rolled sheet. Twas’ Beautiful those many years ago..
Matt O'Dowd you are up there with the best of them......very fortunate to have you (so to speak) and more than a few of us are proud of you. Keep up the good work and thank you.
Every single time I watch one of these videos my mind gets blown, I start having an existential crisis’ and become extremely philosophical questioning everything but not in a bad way. It makes my day to day ‘problems’ seem meaningless. When it all gets down to it in the end we are the universe experiencing it self and becoming self aware. That for me is the beauty of life and why we should cherish each day. Every single atom/particle all started at the same point on a journey that eventually lead to each life on this planet, each planet in a solar system, each solar system in a galaxy and each galaxy in the known universe... Truly the stuff of poetry.
For everyone who's confused: I've been watching these videos diligently for years and they do a great job of scaffolding to get you to the point where you can actually understand this level of cosmology. Go back and rewatch each one as many times as you need, you'll get there! It helps to watch with a friend and try to explain what you understood from each video in your own words. LOVE to the SPACETIME crew! Thanks for making physics accessible to the rest of us!
Same. I have not found this information information on this topic anywhere else on the internet delivered in this way. His confidence in this presentation gives me the impression that this is bleeding edge or only recently revealed or accepted.
Hard Work1994 Maybe undergrads but in graduate and doctorate level most people start researching and contributing so I doubt it but if you have the knowledge, why don’t you get the credentials?
Hard Work1994 Someone wrote a paper on this and I agree with you because I want to study many disciplines but can’t keep coming back to college to keep studying. It’s the way our society is just formed. A lot of it is for gatekeeping and some form of eugenics. You can study under someone so you can get “necessary credentials” to practice. I wish you good luck.
Tiny creatures Living on a tiny rock flying through space Being able to see only a small portion of the universe And yet we are able to see what is there thousands of light years away, create accurate models and understand how the entire universe formed This is the true power of *T H I N C C*
@@slateoffate9812 I don't destroy. I think that most people don't. To cast blame on all of us is a way of excusing the behavior of the few who behave badly.
You are my favourite thing to fall asleep to... I put on old videos and crash out to them. You should have a bedtime channel because you have a warm, comfortable voice mate. X
I do hope that that "another time" for magnetic monopoles isn't too far into the future. I'm quite fascinated by the concept, but just can't wrap my mind around envisioning them. They're just _so_ foreign. I'd love to hear your explanation and walk-through of them.
I would be happy if this series continued forever. I've asked myself questions about this stuff for over a decade, unable to find answers, and now here they are, plain as day.
Wait, the universe was "reheated"? Is that how we got the microwave background radiation? The universe 'Microwaved' itself because it was hungry for left overs? lol
Well it didn't microwave itself, it released energy in all forms of the EM scale much like stars do. But since it was so long ago and the universe is still expanding those EM transmissions are no more than microwaves by the time we now exist in and it will continue to red-shift as time passes.
I'm still unsure how we talk about "time" in the early universe and I often feel like this gets brushed aside in these kinds of descriptions. We say that certain things happened at certain points in time, but since time is inextricably linked to space, then surely the "amount of time" that the universe experienced inflation can't be so trivially described? Doesn't the expansion of space itself influence the description of time in that space? If so, then perhaps it's relatively inconsequential under Hubble expansion, but surely under inflation the effect must be noticeable. Or am I thinking about this all wrong?
TheShampooDude Yes of course, increased gravity also leads to time dilation, you are absolutely right, BUT this is an effect relative to another frame of reference. This means that you yourself don't experience time being any differently if you close in on a black hole, because there is no absolute time (actually there is no time at all, but only spacetime). It just means that observers in different frames of references experience time differently. When these different frames of references are compared, differences arise and become visible (twin paradox etc), but if not, you will never feel "oh passing of time has slowed down" you may rationally understand this effect, but you'll not be able to experience/feel it, but only in comparison to a different frame of reference. If you move closer to a black hole, you don't feel time slowing down. Everything seems like before (as long as not stuff like spaghettification etc sets in), only if you compare it to another frame of reference it becomes obvious that time progressed slower in one frame than the other, but people in both frames of references do not experience this as slowed down or sped up passing of time. As the universe is "everything", any time dilation effect doesn't really matter at all, because there is no other frame of reference you could compare it to. Time dilation is not an absolute effect (because ther is not absolute time), it's an effect relative to other frames of reference (just like Lorenz length contraction)
@@frankschneider6156 But isn't it conjectured that inflation didn't end "evenly"? As in, different parts stopped inflating at different times? Those times are described as only "moments" apart from each other, but from the frame of reference of one part of the universe that is still inflating, another part that has now stopped is experiencing time quite differently (I'm assuming significant differences in gravitational effects as well due to differences in mass per unit of space). Just to be clear, neurochemistry is far more my thing than this level of physics, so go easy on me if I'm talking complete nonsense here... I want to learn!
Dale Bewan Yes there is this CONJECTURE, which doesn't mean it's true, it just means that somebody thinks or thought this might be the case, which might be the true or not. I'm absolutely not an expert on this, so be warned, but my understanding is, that this goes into the multiverse direction. Our observable universe is the only universe that we can and will ever be able to observe. Whatever happens or happened in other parts is completely irrelevant to us, because these parts are completely disjunct from our (observable) universe and we'll never know or be able to perform comparisons, so we'll never see any differences because we can't compare. Factually our observable universe is the only universe that will ever exist for us, although there is likely to be a lot more. BTW, I did my master thesis in neuroscience, so I know what you mean, but I feel limiting oneself to just one small part of natural sciences limits ones understanding of nature. Imho today most significant (thus not incremental) progress in science is made by connecting formerly completely unrelated parts of different natural sciences. so it imho makes sense to not completely focus, and thus not only learn in depth but also in width. Just my 2 cents.
Frank Schneider Thanks, and I am totally with you on the sciences. I consider myself an aspiring polymath in everything I do. I really just wanted to make it clear that I am honestly asking questions, not trying to argue some perspective that I hold.
@Ix Suomi A "theory" in science doesn't have the same definition as we use it in daily life. A theory is a well stablished hypothesis, with a mathematics background. For example the "relativity theory" is not just some explanations about the world without a prove. You should not mistake "theory" with "hypothesis".
LGX That's very likely because you are just missing some basics. Just watch an episode and when you come to a point where you don't understand something, google it until you understand it, then continue and so on. Do this for enough episodes and you'll at some time have pimped your general understanding of basic physics to such a point were all of this makes perfect sense and you understand it.
A couple of questions: can the local minimum in the vacuum energy state give rise to favorable decay of few types of fundamental particles over others? And if so can that somehow explain the matter-antimatter asymmetry? My second question is, if the lowest vacuum energy bubbles coalesced, wouldn't that affect the CMB homogeneity? Big fan of the show.
Dang, good question. I've heard this question worded differently before in relation to the ground state of the higgs field: in which the particles exhibit different properties due to the change in their interaction with said field. Sad to say that's all I got. :/
@@Ringleader17 Thank you. I was just wondering if a meta-stable state would behave similar to least energy vacuum state. So your Higgs field analogy works well.
What a legend, Alan Guth, his concept of the inflaton field is definitely onto something bigger. I got a serene feeling as he explained the re-thermalisation of the early universe. It makes so much sense, the decay of virtual inflaton particles to actual particle converting the potential energy to tangible forms and possibly leading to phase transforms in the inflaton field. Yes I have already watched the sequel video, but the fact that phase transforms can occur in the potential energy of field strengths is so cool, especially when everything heats up again ;) I guess the physical constants in nature would have been absolutely scewed at that initial point of the high energy inflaton field
This is how everything ought to be taught in US schools. This whole channel is like this, allowing for some assumptions of prior knowledge that are pretty understandable given the subject matter. No "skip to the current conclusion, this is how it is and that's what I want you to put on the test along with the names of these people who actually got to feel like they learned things", just an enjoyable buildup of concepts, and historical background into significant points in reaching our current understanding of the universe. And I know, there are often problems that run even deeper than the subject matter in public primary/secondary schools that contribute to the unfortunately degraded form of education, like funding. We really should take education more seriously, and try to elect like-minded people on the subject, because uninspiring education isn't good education for a lot of people.
@wzrubicon 1 I feel like you might be conflating theory and fact a bit (at least with how the terms are used in the scientific realm) because scientific theories are probably better described as frameworks of relations and interactions between very real individual observations (aka what I would say is more commonly understood as a "facts"). In other words, you can _only_ really have theories about such interactions considering there is no way to perceive an "objective" worldview of such causal relationships, only increasingly more consistent and explanatory models based on new observations and alternate hypothesis.
Surfing through PBS space time videos , watching different playlists multiple times ( I watched some videos more than 10 times at this point ) I truly feel like I'm taking an astrophysics course
I've never heard a more... explanatory... explanation of the big bang and inflation. Suddenly I feel like I kinda get it. A lot more than I did before.
Thanks for the video, awesome as always. I just only have issue with the background music/tone theme which I find it distracting (and a bit annoying) specially when I listen to the clip in a quiet zone.
The first thing I noticed (as the video started): O'Dowd is wearing a 'micro patterned shirt' and not a plain T shirt! Well, that's a good change. And now I will pay attention to the content!
Wait, so multiple universes come out of the same inflation field? Somehow this completely overturns my concept of the early universe which was already complete nonsense to begin with. Yep, I don't get it. I'm just sitting here slack-jawed. Thanks for trying anyway.
New variations on the inflation include multiple bubbles due to separate regions ending inflation at random times, while surrounding it keep going. Any separate region will randomly end inflation and create its own bubble universe. Remember these are just theories with no evidence. They are metaphysics at best. Unless evidence can be found for them, they are just ideas.
Love this channel! Can you do an episode about Saturn's rings please? An idea for possible future episodes: It would be cool to learn about some historical theories that have been debunked or abandoned, and why. For example, Tachyon particles Aether theories Various Planet X theories, etc.
A Daddy universe and a Mommy universe, who loved each other very much, got together and, in an intimate, loving, and tender moment, created a big bang, creating our universe.
A theory they predicts LITERALLY everything you mean. This is the problem with string theory, depending on the settings you give it it will give you any answer possible. One of which might be correct for us, but finding it among the possibilities is nigh impossible. Hence the lack of predictions.
@@Mernom String theory is actually better than multiverse. It doesn't predict everything (multiverse), as of recently it can simply have 10^500 possible configurations.
@@cmdr.shepard Multiverse does not predict everything. It is a common misconception that an infinite number of things contain everything. That is false and easy to prove. There are infinite odd numbers but not a single one of them is even. There are infinite number of primes and non of them is divisible by 6. Infinite is not equal to everything. It is possible to have infinite number universes but non of them allow magic to exist.
@@Mernom While I agree, 10^500 is hardly better than infinity in any practical sense, and I'm agnostic myself on string theory... it is making headway. There have been real world predictions made based on string theory variants. I don't pretend to be able to follow the actual math(s) but ironically, the same AdS/CFT models that can be used to describe black holes without mathematical singularities has been used to model condensed matter experiments yielding predictions that were impossible without the framework of string theory.
Another perspective is that before mass, everything was light and moved accordingly. Formation of massive particles slowed expansion and led to the formation of other massive particles. This aglomeration of matter created the first super stars, resulting in the first supermassive black holes. As an analogy, virtual particles can become ever more complex interactions as long as spin and energy are conserved, with more complex interactions giving that virtual particle a longer existence before it collapses. Meaning that a virtual interaction large enough to create mass in a purely energetic universe would create spacetime where none existed, and that gravity would invite more mass leading to even longer existence.
You said that every bubble would continue expanding with a constant speed equal to the speed with witch space expanded when it was formed. But then two bubbles would never be able to collide since the outward space is still expanding exponentially.
Soo...this video gave me a much better idea of the whole vacuum decay thing. And also explains why another vacuum decay is still possible - dark energy is still, in some form, a higher vacuum energy than it otherwise could be, and so yet another decay is possible. I know you guys did a video on just this, but this video in particular gave me a much better understanding of why that is possible and what it would mean, what it would do, etc.
Title of this episode is completely wrong. It should of been "what caused Cosmic inflation". Nevertheless episode was great but I feel like I pressed clickbait.
@@5pecular the babble is but not the physics lol. At least, it is hyper-optimistic where every hypothesis exists ever and can directly be applied to fleshy actors on their colonial space boat voyage. How many times did they pass through 'gravitational anomaly' where they end up walking backwards or something. Then is always fixed eventually by 'fire tachyon pulse at it'
Roger Penrose and Vahe Gurzadyan put forth an idea that solves all the holes in the current inflationary theories called conformal cyclic cosmology (CCC).No breaking current physical laws, no temporary or temporal distortions just what happens from one end of mass death (when matter turns all into photons 10^100+ years) into the current fresh universe.
As far as I understand it, CCC allows bosons to survive passing through a horizon at conformal infinity, but not fermions. This means fermions need to irreversibly convert into bosons when passing through the event horizon of a black hole. I'm not sure if there's a way to conserve information in that scenario. It certainly doesn't agree with the holographic principle, which is the generally accepted solution to the black hole information paradox.
Once more a commendable presentation of a conceptually complex topic. Digesting obtuse specialist journal publications, then distilling them into talking points non-specialist might appreciate, then crafting those into a script and visuals able to communicate the obtuse; that is a commendable and rare accomplishment. Cheers!
