Why Physicists Think Gravity Creates Light 

Nothing can be heavy if nothing is light.

There's an uncertainty in the title. It allows for the interpretation that the fundamental cause of existence of light resides in gravity, somehow. The presentation states that some processes related to gravitational waves can lead to generating photons, wich is a much weaker statement. It's kind of saying that turning the light on is the reason photons exist. :)

This is the perfect level of abstraction for me, I think. Thanks for the great content.

Correction. Alan Guth inflationary theory proposes that the universe expanded in the inflationary period from a plank size to the size of a nugget, effectively in an expansion rate where 2 points separated at speed faster than light (not to the current size as said in this video). Then from nugget size kept expanding but according to the standard big bang theory Very nice video, I enjoyed the explanations and the animations, pretty cool 🙂👍

Hey Dr. Ben Miles, your videos are amazing and you deserve more recognition. Can you please do a video on the recent discovery of the James Webb telescope that found a possible galaxy that formed only 1 billion years after the Big Bang. Not sure how accurate that is so don’t quote me. But I would be very interested.

Interesting hypothesis but as others have posted very difficult if not impossible to determine if this is what actually happened.

Amazing videos as always! Thank you!

07:00 "Two particles that were an atom's width apart before inflation would have been more than a thousand lighyears apart ." Even if the arithmetic per se may be sound, this is a bit confusing, and maybe even misleading. Since we are putting things in perspective, I take it the calculation is hypothetical, because, within the theoretical framework of inflation, there were no particles prior to inflation, and if there had been, the universe was so dense that no two particles could have been much more than a planck length apart. The width of an atom is between 1,000 and 10,000 times that of a proton, which is 10^20 times a planck length. (I'm disregarding the bewildering possibility that the universe might have been infinite already prior to inflation.)

In regards to Cherenkov radiation, The particles are not moving faster than light in a vacumm. Cherenkov radiation results when a charged particle, most commonly an electron, travels through a dielectric medium with a speed greater than light's speed in that medium.

Well, gravity and light both move at the same speed so at least they have something in common.

Since youtube created the "playback in feeds" feature, i usually watch all videos in my feeds only without opening them...... BUT this video made me open it.. Truly a masterpiece! Just subscribed!

Excellent explanation 👌 sir...I love ❤ the way you explained..thank you sir 👍

Wait so gravity has particles? I thought ‘gravity,’ according to special relativity, was caused by an object being so massive that it ‘bends’ the lines of space time towards it?

Gravity Light is better than Bud Light😂

Great job man 👍always interesting content

I've always figured the expansion wasn't so much about space extending outward, but rather inward. The so called "bang" was more like an implosion where the resolution of space increased. Like Planck scale increased, analogous to a centimeter growing more notches of measure, say 100x more notches yet within the same length of the original centimeter. So there same effect, kinda sorta, but with the understanding we still live inside a small singularity type sized space. That the space within grew, and that's a subtle difference. Purely speculative, off course, but it does help fit some of the vacuum energy conundrums this research paper attempts to tackle. I like this theory because it's a novel way to think about the topic.

Unifying gravity with the electromagnetic force would be absolutely world changing.

This was fantastic, thank you. ✨✨✨

Given the Big Bang - inflation - particles separating - and the weakness of gravity -- atoms collecting into stars [ not likely ] -- stars collecting into galaxies [ nonsense ] -- and galaxies colliding [ impossible ] !! Or did matter suddenly change directions ?! This has always bothered me. A little help here.

Time is fascinating. I worked the subway stations for nearly 10 years. From one end of the city to the other. Every so often I would notice the city would be saying that, "Today just flew by" or "The day was just dragging along." How can an entire city complain about the same time paradox unless it was effected by it. Maybe a time distorted bubble the earth passes through in its revolution around the sun. Maybe random waves of time distortion hitting the earth? Maybe they're randomly given off by the sun. Maybe they're from outside our Terran system and reach us in intervals. ???? Ti-i-i-ime, is on my side. Yes, it is!

For me there is a faster than light side of the universe where contrary to what we know that we need "infinite" energy to match the speed of light, in the other side one needs infinite energy to slow down to the speed of light. So in the buffer zone between the 2 is the shockwave where massless particles are driven, like light.

I have no idea what I'm talking about but in terms of visable light, i learned somewhere that its due to whatever particle being a high enough energy level that that it can't "contain" whatever energy exterted upon it without releasing it as visable light. Something like wood emitting no visable light but coals emit visable light because they are at or are releasing a higher energy level.

Turns out more logical than i expected :) Good.

I was thinking about this for some time. Einstein suggested (later proved) that energy creates gravity. Can't this process happen in reverse as well (gravity creating energy in a form of photons?)

This is all entirely theoretical though, isn’t it? Because it relies on inflatons and gravitons, both of which are placeholder particles that we don’t know for sure exist.

Interesting concept to think about

inflation does not EXPLAIN why the Universe expanded quickly at first. It is only used to create a theory consistent with most parameters we observe today. MOST not all. The quick expansion is a postulate to explain the other things not the rapid expansion per se. and it does not explain ALL, there is a lot of problems that still remain.

Let me know what you think! And thanks to today's sponsor Curiosity Stream! Go to sponsr.is/cs_drbenmiles and use code DRBENMILES to save 25% off today. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today’s video.

Very interesting, thank you - though the existence of Gravitons is only theoretical, because we haven’t detected them yet. However, if they did behave in the manner described, it would mean that Gravity acts as a Force, when we are always told it isn’t a Force, and it would mean that Gravity acts differently on a cosmic scale.

Got to go to work but can't wait to watch this later!!

Awesome topic, it's really noble prize worthy topic

5:30 Inflation models have 6,000,000 versions. It is infinitely tweak-able. It is unfalsifiable. But most if not all, including the most popular ones, postulate that the “inflaton field” turns on at a certain point and turns off after expansion. Thus we will not detect any so-called inflaton. You can create or destroy anything you like with the math-such is the reason particle physics publish thousands of papers a year in which each author postulates some new particle to explain some anomalous statistical data-always making assumptions and adding complexity needlessly-only to be proven wrong. The entire field is out of control. Thousands of particle physicists worked on “super symmetry” for years which we had absolutely no evidence for but made the math more elegant or took the idea of symmetry as beautiful even as we know that ultimately the symmetries we observe are only approximate and always break down. Everything about this theory of inflation is pure speculation and utter nonsense. Some speculate that it is or is related to the Higgs field-but this is because they have so many much free time to postulate parameters which are unknowable, unobservable, undetectable and only exists in math. Current cosmology is broken and we need a new paradigm

Inflaton and gravitons are both not even theoretical but conjectures as there is zero evidence for either existing, and yet extrapolating how they might work to produce photons seems like an even further stretch of nonsense.

I want to be a physicist. I can easily imagine pretend particles to fit my model of the universe.

Your ALAN GUTH PRONOUNCIATION IS 100% on point

Dr Ben, I realize that as a science communicator you may choose from time to time to phase conjectures as fact to make the subject more approachable but I would remind you that causality even in theoretical works is invariant. In QFT a 'known ' particle can be assigned a field , but this does not apply for a 'unknown' particle as this creates a circular validation argument which cannot hold.

Our theoretical physicists keep bringing new levels of meaning to "going from the sublime to the ridiculous"... We'll have to wait until we are gods to test this one...

If all forces were once a single unified force then all forces are related and can perhaps create each other still.

No, It's the creation of matter that creates gravity. Outline: Time Light *and Distance* Problem Explained I. Introduction The assumption people have is that light years in outer space equals the same measure of distance and passage of time on earth. This is the reason they think that an age can be assigned to the universe. This is curious knowing that there is no single measure of distance or rate of the passing of time in the universe. General relativity explains that the local rate of time and the measure of distance depend on the amount of matter or mass in the vicinity. Elsewhere in the universe the rate of time and measure of distance depend on the absence of matter in the vicinity. Assuming the math is correct and there is a singularity in a black hole, time is stopped and there is no distance. In contrast, the lagrange point between supermassive black holes is a place where there is the least amount of gravity in the universe and where *both* the rate of time passes by the fastest *and* the measure of distance is the most expanded. What the measurements are is unknown since no one is there to make a comparison. II. Differing Measures of Time and Distance due to GR The area of space in our line of sight between us and distant galaxies is mostly running at a much faster rate of time. Not only is time passing by faster between galaxies, the measures of distance are much larger effectively reducing the distance between galaxies. Observed phenomena in outer space such as redshift, superluminal motion measured to be seven times the speed of light, and apparent faster motion of outer spiral arms of galaxies are due to the faster rates of time and the expanded measures of distance the farther out from the center of the galaxy it is. Incidentally the asteroid that was knocked off course moved faster than expected. The expansion of the universe is not required to explain the observed redshift of light from distant galaxies because the expanded distance and faster rates of time explain both the redshift and the faster than expected motion of objects the farther away from the center of the galaxy that it is. It's not the same as our flat observations of cats and dogs locally here on earth where we don't observe differing measures of distance and time. III. Local Rate of Time and Measure of Distance due to GR Locally, the measure of distance and rate of time doesn't change much where we are inside of our galaxy. However, the area in our line of sight between us and distant galaxies is extreme and running at a much faster rate of time as well as an expanded measure of distance outside our galaxy compared to where we are near Sagittarius A, Milky Way's black hole (where our rate of time is much slower and our measure of distance is much more contracted). The same way the earth appears flat locally, our universe also *appears* to be relatively flat locally. However, over great distances throughout the universe there are vastly differing measures of distance and differing rates of time from black holes to the lagrange points between black holes where there is very little acceleration compared to our relatively flat contracted local frames of reference near Sagittarius A. The clocks are running faster outside of galaxies and the measuring sticks are larger meaning things are actually less distant than they appear to us to be from our position and our measurements near the center of the galaxy. *We can't project our measurements onto the rest of the universe.* Gravity drops off exponentially the *farther* it is from the singularity center of the galaxy. The more gravity drops off outside of the galaxy and in between galaxies, the more distance will be expanded and the faster the rate of time will be. It's also the reason distant galaxies *appear* to be ten times more massive than than closer ones. IV. Vacuum Energy of Space It turns out that the vacuum energy of space is due to the frame dragging of black holes that are growing in size from gobbling up spacetime regardless of the amount of matter being consumed. Recent findings of a team of scientists have found that dark energy or vacuum energy is associated with supermassive black holes that are all growing in size regardless of the amount of matter being consumed, as opposed to being associated with an ever expanding universe into oblivion for no reason. Supermassive black holes are the most powerful forces in the universe with far reaching effects of gravity and vacuum energy. The problem and solution is that between galaxies, all of the galaxies all around are all together pulling and drawing in spacetime, as well as exerting equal gravitational forces from all around on empty space. This is the reason there is very little acceleration between galaxies and where there is expanded distance and a faster rate of time. V. Conclusion The expanded space or distance between galaxies due to the absence of matter explains the observed redshift without the need for a nonsensical universe expanding into oblivion for no reason. It also means the distances between galaxies are not as far as they appear to us to be. This means that 13.8 billion years is the same as 6,000 years and vice versa *in the same universe and in the same amount of time.* A day is also like a thousand years and vice versa in the same created universe. The reason why people stumble over the "time light problem" in outer space is due to not taking general relativity into account.

Maybe we should wait until we confirm that "gravitons" are actually a thing. Seems like they are assuming some Quantum Gravity theory that we don't actually have.

I imagine this is related to Hawking radiation somehow since black holes radiate their mass away (really slowly).

I thought photons turned into gravity waves by gravitational lensing and photons were generated by the reverse process. Inflatons to photons through standing gravitational shockwaves in a medium where mass concentrations are many light-years apart is an idea that I will have to absorb. Thank you.

...and That-Which-Is set for Itself a grand Puzzle and magnificent Playground...

The inflaton is imagined. Outline: Time Light *and Distance* Problem Explained I. Introduction The assumption people have is that light years in outer space equals the same measure of distance and passage of time on earth. This is the reason they think that an age can be assigned to the universe. This is curious knowing that there is no single measure of distance or rate of the passing of time in the universe. General relativity explains that the local rate of time and the measure of distance depend on the amount of matter or mass in the vicinity. Elsewhere in the universe the rate of time and measure of distance depend on the absence of matter in the vicinity. Assuming the math is correct and there is a singularity in a black hole, time is stopped and there is no distance. In contrast, the lagrange point between supermassive black holes is a place where there is the least amount of gravity in the universe and where *both* the rate of time passes by the fastest *and* the measure of distance is the most expanded. What the measurements are is unknown since no one is there to make a comparison. II. Differing Measures of Time and Distance due to GR The area of space in our line of sight between us and distant galaxies is mostly running at a much faster rate of time. Not only is time passing by faster between galaxies, the measures of distance are much larger effectively reducing the distance between galaxies. Observed phenomena in outer space such as redshift, superluminal motion measured to be seven times the speed of light, and apparent faster motion of outer spiral arms of galaxies are due to the faster rates of time and the expanded measures of distance the farther out from the center of the galaxy it is. Incidentally the asteroid that was knocked off course moved faster than expected. The expansion of the universe is not required to explain the observed redshift of light from distant galaxies because the expanded distance and faster rates of time explain both the redshift and the faster than expected motion of objects the farther away from the center of the galaxy that it is. It's not the same as our flat observations of cats and dogs locally here on earth where we don't observe differing measures of distance and time. III. Local Rate of Time and Measure of Distance due to GR Locally, the measure of distance and rate of time doesn't change much where we are inside of our galaxy. However, the area in our line of sight between us and distant galaxies is extreme and running at a much faster rate of time as well as an expanded measure of distance outside our galaxy compared to where we are near Sagittarius A, Milky Way's black hole (where our rate of time is much slower and our measure of distance is much more contracted). The same way the earth appears flat locally, our universe also *appears* to be relatively flat locally. However, over great distances throughout the universe there are vastly differing measures of distance and differing rates of time from black holes to the lagrange points between black holes where there is very little acceleration compared to our relatively flat contracted local frames of reference near Sagittarius A. The clocks are running faster outside of galaxies and the measuring sticks are larger meaning things are actually less distant than they appear to us to be from our position and our measurements near the center of the galaxy. *We can't project our measurements onto the rest of the universe.* Gravity drops off exponentially the *farther* it is from the singularity center of the galaxy. The more gravity drops off outside of the galaxy and in between galaxies, the more distance will be expanded and the faster the rate of time will be. It's also the reason distant galaxies *appear* to be ten times more massive than than closer ones. IV. Vacuum Energy of Space It turns out that the vacuum energy of space is due to the frame dragging of black holes that are growing in size from gobbling up spacetime regardless of the amount of matter being consumed. Recent findings of a team of scientists have found that dark energy or vacuum energy is associated with supermassive black holes that are all growing in size regardless of the amount of matter being consumed, as opposed to being associated with an ever expanding universe into oblivion for no reason. Supermassive black holes are the most powerful forces in the universe with far reaching effects of gravity and vacuum energy. The problem and solution is that between galaxies, all of the galaxies all around are all together pulling and drawing in spacetime, as well as exerting equal gravitational forces from all around on empty space. This is the reason there is very little acceleration between galaxies and where there is expanded distance and a faster rate of time. V. Conclusion The expanded space or distance between galaxies due to the absence of matter explains the observed redshift without the need for a nonsensical universe expanding into oblivion for no reason. It also means the distances between galaxies are not as far as they appear to us to be. This means that 13.8 billion years is the same as 6,000 years and vice versa *in the same universe and in the same amount of time.* A day is also like a thousand years and vice versa in the same created universe. The reason why people stumble over the "time light problem" in outer space is due to not taking general relativity into account.

Regarding the inflaton: Isn't it odd that every single time particle physicists assign particle behaviors and characteristics to spacetime (inflaton, graviton) they can't prove it? It strikes me that the particle physicist's disdain for spacetime and Relativity finds it's origins in their inability to accept that spacetime constantly defies them.

Algorithm slapped me right across the face the same month I've been wondering about the critical mass that allows stars to begin fusion, I haven't even looked anything up yet!

Juicy Universe Details(TM) Sounds like the name for a refreshing beverage

When people say physics were different at the beginning of the Universe, my first guess is that an assumption is wrong. Physics being different should take large amounts of evidence.

My idea so I get to name it! Voyager 1 is now in interstellar time or "Mikey's Time." "V-ger's" message has sped up now that it's outside our suns time bubble or, "Terran Time." It will be faster still when "V-ger" sends a message from beyond the Milky Way's time bubble. (That name is still up for grabs.) Then there's Outside the Local Group time bubble, so on and so on until we get to the, "True Interstellar Time Standard." Now that "V-ger" is in interstellar space, it's also in the Milky Way's STANDARD, faster moving, interstellar time or "Mikey's Time." This can be proven by turning off everything except its clock and transmitter. Have "V-ger" read time for as long as possible. They WILL show the flow of time speeds up the further away you get from any celestial bodies. Until you reach the Milky Way's time standard or "Mikey's Time." •Our sun's time bubble: "Terran Time" we know and have measured. •Milky Way's time bubble or "Mikey's Time." The rate/flow of TIME outside any influence but within the Milky Way: We just got there and are still figuring. Wild guess I'd say time will increase in speed, now and until V-ger is outside the Ort cloud .007-.07% faster, maybe. Just for reference. •Local Group's time bubble or the rate/flow of time outside of any influence but within the Local Group: Name still open and unknown. Wild guess .08% to a couple seconds faster, maybe. Used just for reference. •Outside any influence in the, "True Interstellar Time Standard," or...;-P Name NOT up for grabs BUT just begging to be measured. The rate/flow of time is fastest here. (Time flows fastest here so it's best to have your motor boat.) ;-P A minute is a minute in all. It's the rate/flow I'm talking about. The Milky Way's Interstellar Time Standard will be known as, "Mikey's Time." Pass it on, please and thank you.

Very interesting and didactic video! You explained something really complex in a much more understandable way

Thanks!

Its like a fairytale in a fairytale.

Can you link to the study?

Shake a speck of spacetime hard enought and light comes out. Sounds about right since the electromagnetic quantum fields were shaken along with the spacetime. How about the reverse, if one creates a strong enough electromagnetic standing wave perhaps gravitational waves would come out?

verily, the notion of gravity engendering light is a concept of great intrigue worthy of exploration

Please make a video about what are magnetic field lines are made of. I’ve read they are made of virtual photons but it still doesn’t make sense to me.

When we talk about how quick inflation occured at the beginning of the universe, at that point the concept of time was different, maybe meaningless, we can say it took a fraction of a second, but it could just as easily been a fraction of infinity.

I always think it funny that astrophysicists talk like it is certain they know what happened to the nearest billionth of a second at the start, then are now uncertain what happened during the next billion years or so. (Uncertain because of JWST' find of early galaxies.) I am not questioning it, just find somehow ironic.

The idea that interacting gravity waves might create light via a variant of Cherenkov radiation is interesting since it uses Einstein's well-proven geometric theory of gravity. In contrast, dragging in Pauli and Fierz's 1930s attempt to discard Einstein's GR by _declaring_ space flat and adding their mathematically inconsistent idea of a boson-based pseudo gravity on top makes the paper unsound and much less interesting. The idea that Pauli-Fierz "gravitons" - which, to this day, remain mathematically inconsistent - unify Einstein's gravity and quantum theory is no more plausible now than it was in the 1940s. It is, however, a _lot_ more popular these days. The Pauli-Fierz approach necessarily creates only a gravity mimic since all you have to do is curve the flat space underneath it and voila! - you have Einstein's gravity all over again. Pauli and Fierz chose the cheap path of defining Einstein's general relativity out of existence. It would be nice if folks got back to the far more difficult problem - and, also, far more intriguing - issue of how to unify _topological_ gravity with quantum theory.

So are they saying it’s like the ocean giving life 3:53 ? So the pressure reverb 10:40 is the expansion ? Ie wave motion ?

If “density” Is the amount of X per unit of space, what is a “density fluctuation in the fabric of spacetime”?

It kind of explains why tiny space particles and rocks weigh heavy after they hit the ground and appear light when floating in space. Light and gravity seem the same which also makes sense of the fact that we humans too are light beings in dense bodies.

@dr Ben miles That’s how he and everyone else pronounces Dr Guth’s name. Good job!

Why do we talk about the universe being a small size in the early universe yet today we don’t know if it is infinite in size or if it has any curvature?

They haven't a clue ....they're making it all up ! Terry Pratchett had them all sussed.

So whenever there's something not explainable, particle physicists cook up a new fundamental particle??

THIS, ive always suspected it!

"Hot dense ball"? No I don't think we know that, we know hot and dense, but the ball shape is not certain. The best guess, as i understand it, is the universe went from a singularity to everywhere all at once, and everywhere all at once could be a plane or a saddle or potentially a sphere, but we don't know for certain. We see the microwave background radiation as a sphere around us, because light takes time to travel and we are looking out from a single perspective.

Someone point out when we discovered Gravitons? My understanding is the latest discovery was the Gluons create mass and seem to be at lease partially responsible for Gravity as we know it. I understood the description such that Gluons seem to attached matter to the fabric of space-time. So this seems like more theoretical BS for the sake of showing you could come up with a possible model rather than an observable model.

Inflaton? Now they’re just making fun of us. I don’t think they will ever find a graviton either. Gravity is not a force and requires no particle mediation.

Let there be gravity, and there was gravity.

It should be "some physicists" in the title. We do not have yet a working quantum gravity theory so the graviton -> photon transformation is pure speculation.

i have a question about the speed at which you propose that the universe expanded during the "big bang"... what about nothing being faster than light?

Why does it seem that Physicists do not understand that light is just Heat from friction and that it just atomic molecules moving within other crystalline structures in small amounts to bunches at varring speeds depending on the density and size of the structure the structure that holds it and that the "Light"/"Heat" is the motion of the snaller atomic structure withing the larger stuctures. Or that the "Color" of the light is due to the speed and saturation of those smaller structures moving within the larger ones. Complete Saturation of Color turns black while complete saturation of light/heat turns white, yellow is it's its median (Grey)×2=0.000...4^3>|0||0|~Clear~|0||1|Black×WhiteClearWhite×Black|1|Infinite|0||1||1|Black[Grey]0!=1{0}0.000...1=8^3°+/|0|1/2^30!=11=0!1/2^3●○0.00:00.00!=1~8^3>ClearClear0!=1=0!Yellow|0||1|

I am not against a person speaking freely on different theories but this guy comes off like this stuff is true.

I truly have a problem about the first moments... because time is not a constant, but speed of light is. The universe expanded in a fraction of a second, but all maybe in our time definition. In that first moments and the moments after happened so much, if we would take lightspeed as a messurement and not time itself, I think we would talking about billions of years... this is at least my opinion... but if speed of light is a constant and time is relative, then this is the only right way to see that, I think... *edit*: ...and finally, light was every quantum existing in the first moments until more massiv subatomic parts and even the first atoms started to build, but for this, it has to cool down a lot at first, in my eyes, but this alone would need eons.

Why would it be infinitely small if it's not a finite universe now? Don't we think the universe is flat and infinite in extent now? How'd we get from "a tiny ball" to an infinite size?

Hawking/Unrul Blackbody/Graybody Radiation is an example of Super-Tension!.

Gravity compresses aether particles which gives E =mc squared. Light is a high energy wave from the friction of 2 particles which are spinning at the speed of light being pushed together.

And the problem is ..? Gravity = gravitas refers, simply, to (the strength of) .. attraction .. (magnetism, Magnesian Stone = capable of drawing iron to it) in matter (concrete or observable things). That is the relationship between 'things' (hence affecting or informing notions of 'time', a particular measurement of two pieces of thingness in passing each other, or 'space' a measurement of the distance between things, generally or in particular) and thus of force (motive power used or given off, for example - electra, electric and static, a standing or stable point, and status = detectable emanations from that point, including sound, whether heard by us or not). Light = lux, lumen - illumination refers to the .. radiation (powerful expulsion or aversion, casting off) .. within, from, through or around matter (concrete things, bits of observable material, translucent, opaque or dense). Its apparent ability to transcend or ignore material obstacles indicates the power of its radiance (from one static point of emission, transmitted, and received by another static point, as detectable in sound and light, and thus travelling through space and time, and even matter .. if not usually observed by 'us'). Not so much a more or less observable (by us) push-me-pull-you beast as the ordinary means and methods found in the principles of attraction and aversion .. look at the office workforce, some attractions terminate in glaring, ney, explosive aversions, and at times some aversions can turn to attraction .. if, but only if, the amber-like magnetism is there (also with a bit of a glow if one can perceive it). ;o)

"Energy can be created only when the applied force is the inherent property of source" 💯

AND THERE IS THAT GRAVITATIONAL RED SHIFT EFFECT THAT GUY GOT THE NOBEL FOR !!! MAKES SENSE !!!

Consider light as visible point of interaction of radiant energy, such as is emitted by stars, with electro-magnetic energy, such as are caused by gravitational bodies such as planets. Protons can then be seen as being neither particle or wave, but being capable of showing properties of both through their interactions of wave with field.

@9:47 Maybe you can get this effect when two black holes collide?

"Inflatons" I really feel like we're all being trolled.

I don't know if agree or not. Inflation should be a lower layer of gravity fabric. So , a "way" to try to quantize gravity. Should be just called "propriety of gravity itself" because at the moment is not possible in experimental mode unpack gravity to understand its components.

Good stuff.. ive speant the last few weeks thrashing this out in large language models to better understsnd faster than light light , super massive voids , high and low pressure events..

I wonder what was the definition of a lightyear, or a year for that matter, at the period of cosmic inflation 🤔

Hey loved the video, wasn’t clear me to though if gravity/space moves faster than light speed then photons are created. Then does that mean FTL travel would cause light? And if that light energy is created it must be a “friction on” on FTL? Please tell me I’m wrong

I still feel every current cosmological theory is about as plausible as a moon made of blue cheese.

10:33 - Having a natural black hole to study would really settle a lot of debate and mystery. I suspect the difference between particle collider black holes and a natural version is the difference between studying a campfire instead of the Sun. Isn't it possible that we have our concept of "inside" and "outside" inverted, when considering forces like gravity? Inflationary forces in the sense of a "big bang" means there should be an epicenter that remains even to this day. Somehow gravity was overcome; perhaps in the same way it is overcome when superfluidity occurs (the settling of primary forces dictates the dispersion of particles, which themselves have a secondary force; where the secondary forces localized by particles become overcomes and "nullifies" the primary force which collected/concentrated the particles). Perhaps EM could be compared to fluid dynamics. Air moving so fast that it is barely effected by gravity. Air that pushes into other materials like water being absorbed by woven cotton. In other words, the conversion to thermal energy (re-scaling). Radiating heat would be like evaporation of water. So, black holes might actually be balls of light, in some respects. Balls of rendered mass, converting to another form of matter / energy due to the gravitational trap. A black hole would function like a particle accelerator... Has anyone ever described it that way? It makes so much more sense to describe a particle accelerator as a ring of a black hole.

Two Universes are intersecting which causes gravity by energy interactions. There is a differential between the 2 Universes. One is moving faster than the other. Both are 2 dimensional causing a 3rd in the collision process.

Esentialy, if imaginary particle derived from very hypotetical idea, managed to create a gravity wave propagating trough Ether, but not your ordinary Ether, but the one with refractor index less then one, then that gravity wave might loose part of its energy as EM wave. Yeah seems about right.. Following same idea you could probably produce EM wave by shifting two charges in space with gravity wave of great amplitude.

I don't think it was a hot dense ball because black holes don't even emit light,

Mass, all mass, can generate energy. Space on the other hand, is a standing decompression field which deletes energy equal to that generated. Since gravity refers to the space around mass, not mass itself, it is backwards to ascribe the generation of energy to gravity. This is all down to Einstein's General Relativity. The decompression of space accounts for Universal red shift. The Doppler Effect does not apply to Universal red shift.

"My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts."

Light is everywhere where nothing exist without light

Why would there be fluctuations in the quantum field if there was nothing to create the fluctuations?

Last universe evaporates completely. Begins to expand. Eventually a dew point causes condensation causes gravity. Gravity draws time space into light.. inflating.. so to speak. Light into universe.

Sounds like we need a bigger particle accelerator.